Transcripts For CSPAN2 Andrew 20240704

Not alone. These Television Companies supports cspan2 as a public service. Co hello and welcome to the program. Im with the Georgia Historical Society and we are so glad you joined us today for the special program joined by doctor andrew at western carolina university. The theme of this years festival is about the importance of place in georgia and we are going to be focusing today on the experience of the cherokee people and Georgia History, what happened to them and the way georgians have remembered their history and experience particularly with removal coming all the way up into the present. I want to welcome you to the program thank you so much for being here with us. Its good to talk with you all. Let me give a quick introduction. As i mentioned, professor of history where he teaches courses on native american and United States history. He a participates in a cherokee Study Program as you might expect and is the author of this book published by the university of North Carolina press called cherokee removal and the contest for southern memories. I mentioned the university of North Carolina. The theme, and i will give the official title for 2021 and 22 from the changing landscape the importance of place. Lets start byl talking about te cherokee if you will and fit them into if you can very briefly the history and tell us what happened. The traditional cherokee homeland is in west carolina where i am today and where i work very close to the heart of the traditional cherokee homeland. But that homeland extended into areas that are now particularly important after the American Revolution and theres a bit of aeo geographical shift as cherokees lost land to a little bit of a shift with the center of things moving, still center here in the mountains, but its become quite significant particularly when the National Capital is located and placed near calhoun. So, the land that is kind of claimed by georgia within its state borders includes the cherokeehe territory into the mt famous whim that enters into Georgia History, the state of georgia, the government of georgia is the actor that does the most to create a political crisis that eventually results in the forced migration of cherokees and to indian territory. With Georgia History its like an antagonist i guess you would say to the State Government of georgia. The state of georgia vigorously pursues the disposition of the Cherokee Nations. The removal of many peoples including the cherokees is a central goal of early georgia. We are talking about the importance of place. How long roughly have the cherokeeee people been living right now in western carolina was this a homeland that went back centuries . The center of things tends to be more of North Carolina but in terms of what today the identified as the homeland, this is it. Southeastern tennessee, this is where creation happens from time and memorial if you want to use the western term so this is the center of things. To assume that there are those that remain still in those areas if you were walking on the appalachian trail are you likely in a place where the cherokee would have been for millennia . The settlements like most tend to be clustered in valleys. Sort of looking down upon places that have been inhabited for millennia. Just speaking about the place we know its a nonnative settlement. Its a valley that they have within. These are ancient places and all someones ancestral homelands. The cherokee people would have been living, none of the most popular images in the icculture identify not rooted in the landscape but pretty much everybody here in the southeast is agricultural we are talking about agricultural towns so the most important towns also have other center. You are talking about a farming people and use a wide range of other resources in the landscape but its very much rooted in the specific valleys. At this is a world that is defined by these river valley in the town organizations, agricultural towns centers. What role did the cherokee play in the American Revolution and s american colonial settlement begins to move westward but by the middle of the 18th century it wasnt quite the problem. But they did have by most tribes. Like most of the large recommendations of the eastern part of north america the cherokees whoo participate in te American Revolution do so on the side of the british. They are not doing this. Of those who do participate do so to push back against nonnative settlement so its a gamble but it is used as an opportunity to push back against the encroaching settlement. This works out very badly for cherokee communities in response to cherokee attacks on frontier settlements. North carolina, virginia, georgia sends invasions into the roadll focused on to essentially destroy everything they can find. For the revolution in this part of the world and its coming out of the colonial leaders and the people involved in these invasions its pretty much genocidal language and the need to drive cherokees from the frontier in order to as they see the need to eliminate a threat duringis this crisis. In the colonies and Great Britain the other native peoples who are continuing to fight a war that is rooted in the revolution well into the 1790s and so its of this long period of warfare that takes a terrible toll and something of a tragedy for many groups. To use this alliance with Great Britain as a way of protecting their own autonomy and freedom so theres a need of struggles for liberty and freedom taking place in the backcountry, but these are being fought against the people. Any idea how many people we aree talking about. Talking about the 15 to 20,000 people in the cherokee territory thats a rebound from the revolutionary era thats restored after the low point in the revolution so. During the revolution they continue to struggle against the americans in the time of the removal, the cherokee were a different kind of people than what we traditionally think of and what we see portrayed in Popular Culture as to what americanan indians look like, wt they were doing and what the societye is like. The most famous image in the early 19th century is the civilized tribe supplied. Dealing with the United States in the wake of the revolution to make adjustments essentially in an effort to find a future in which they can coexist. He keeps coming back demanding more and more land and putting more and more pressure on them. So it encourages cultural, social and economic changes and relationships with native americans. They have a reputation as being more receptive. Its the idea that they have adopted elements of the American Culture andnd society and economics but thats clearly an attempt to nullify the United States and to make the case that the United States can leave the Cherokee Nation alone and so in the Public Record rhetoric of course they had always been farmers. We are becoming christian, you get this image of the civilized tribe. A lot of things are changing but its like a selective adaptation but many people through the interior. They could adopt elements of the economic practice and the adaptation without they often is happening which you can see in the Cherokee Nation and other places with sort of selective adaptation especially of economic practices. Beyond that, during this time you see the cherokee officials in some cases welcoming the missionaries to come into the territory. Utthis isnt an effort to abandn the waves but to make sure some people are able to speak english and are able to operate successfully. Its about adaptation to the presence of the United States generally with the hope that by adjusting to the United States and trying to convince the United States about many people are going along with some of its policy agenda that this will help them to hold on to what they have, hold onto their politicalw autonomy remain here in the cherokee homeland. But yes the economy is changing especially you have more people as the century goes on some social changes and then politically the most profound change politically you see the Cherokee Nation and leaders forming a Central Government. The political, traditional political structure of the people is decentralized and tended to be more or less autonomous, different towns and areas connected together, but the towns tended to be able to follow their own policies basically and guide their own affairs. In the early part of the century in response to the United States as a way to try to prevent further loss of land and ultimately to prevent forced deportation to prevent removal you see they are creating a Central Government that ends up briefly taking it as its capital and in creating that government, they areic attempting to createa political voice that will be able to hold the United States and states like georgia at bay so this is an adjustment, and there is a sense among a lot of us that think that while the government is created at the same time you still have a lot of traditional political practices taking place in more traditional communities. And they dont want to emphasize too much this sense of change. Its about adjustment and adjustment with the goal of holding onto land, protecting the autonomy. Were the cherokee participating in slavery during this period . During this part of the century you do see some cherokee familieshe adopting the model of slavery that is prevalent, but then there are other forms of slavery. Theres captive slavery and captives as part of war that has much deeper history that goes back b before. In terms of the institution of slavery that we generally think of, yes you do see africanamerican slaves in the Cherokee Nation in the early part of the century. Is there any discussion or even negotiation during all this time leading up to, for example we now think of as removal. Was there any discussion between the u. S. Authorities and cherokee officials over becoming american citizens . Was that effort on the table or every possibility . So, that is generally in a sense, yes. Theres kind of an expectation that sooner or later native americans are going to kind of blend into the broader american population. Thats an aspect of expectations that the United States always brings in the century to the native people that they are going to go away in one way or another either through dispose meant or some form of assimilation. Soil that early, those early policies that encouraged the cultural, social and economic change they generally have this assumption that sooner or later, sometime in the future youre goingo to see the population jut kind of being absorbed or sort of dwindling individually will become a part of the United States. But coupled with that of course is in the United States where it sounds like theres Public Acceptance so you have this dual image where the deeply seated racism of American Society is at odds with this assumption or assimilation and so the idea of native americans becoming like equal citizens, that sort of a remote possibility at best in practical terms, but as like a policy, you do see this expectation that might happen, so its a strange situation thats held out as a possibility but as like a practical thing. Its not really a promise that the United States comes to fill. The idea that they are going to become white is not ever really on the table. It is andnd it isnt. So in the sense like you will see intellectuals or policymakers say sooner or later their destiny is to become a part of the Great Republic about republic butin practical terms t a society that is deeply fears nonwhites of all kinds and that doesnt offer in any sort of practical way quality. And so its there but not as a promise that the United States can fulfill. On one sort of slight issue to that question, in some of the early treaties inni the century there is an experiment with citizenship so in 1817 and 19 theres this all for that heads of households an individual cherokee can enroll and receive individualin landholding. They can choose family land and part of this is a promise that they will essentially become state citizens of North Carolina or wherever. So theres this experiment in a citizenship in those treaties, but what happens in practical terms is that the United States promiseses this to the cherokee people in those treaties, but the states in which they find themselves living they dont accept that and so here in North Carolina for example, there are thesee individual landholdings including and part of our campus but obviously the state of North Carolina and within my own speculators including many of the people that are like the founders set out to strip those lands from cherokees and so that captures to be this sense that in an intellectual sense of the United States could promise someday equal citizenship but in practical terms, nobody is offering that. In practical terms and its very, very clear i think to native americans but they are not t going to be accepted, even if they want to become part of the United States. So theres a lot ofhe reasons tt you wouldnt in the early 19th century. Even if they want to become part of the United States, the quality isnt something thats going to be offered by the u. S. So in many ways then it sort of fled the experience after the emancipation in the jim crow theory no matter how much education, no matter how much industrial training, and no matter how much they are able to sort of become what white americans think they should be, they are not accepted and they are not going to be. So take us through removal because i did want to get into the memory part of this but despite having lived here for millennia seeing their homeland central to their identity, georgians and the United States president and federal government decided they needed to. Be removed. This happened basically in the late 1830s; is that correct . By the 1820s, 1830s by the 1830s it had become the central goal of americans and thats tied to yointerjections. Jackson was along time advocate when he was elected to make removal as an official policy, one of their primary goals, objectives of his first term. So its an old idea that becomes the focus for policy in the 1830s so removal policy creates a set of mechanisms for deportation. As far as georgia is concerned it has less to do with georgia as the boundaries that were established after the American Revolution which when you look at the map if you look at what georgia looked like in 1790, 1800, a lot of the land georgia claimed as georgia is in fact preterritory cherokee territory. What this does then is it creates this drive to possess those lands. This is encouraged by some of the economic changes of the period. The economic boom as early as the 19th century. Theres this pressure for many decades coming from georgia and many other states as well focused on as they would see it completing the territory that was promised. And this puts them on a collision course with the creek nation and Cherokee Nation because these are lands guaranteed by treaty with the United States so you have a political demand by states like georgia that should become part of the state of georgia should be taken away from me as nations then you have repeated promises from the United States that this land is cherokee land or creek land and you have an obligation to help cherokees defend those lands so what happens in the removal area is after the removal policy you end up with a president ial administration, jackson and to some extent of congress that is willing to basically to ignore those treaty promises and allow states like georgia to create conditions of crisis for native people in bowl native people will then ougive up and agree to accept removal. So its this sort of triangular politics at the very least triangular, probably a few other dimensions but the Cherokee Nation State Government often times State Governments pushing the hardest with the United States acting then asked power is going to step in and negotiate removal trees and accomplish the deportation of native americans. What one of the things youve done in your work that is so interesting is after this period where talking about, the americans are removed for all intents and purposes at least in georgia and there is a strong band of the eastern band but here in georgia, i know they come up with this territory that spread africanamerican slavery into this part of the cotton kingdom in some ways it becomes an important part of the history of 18thcentury georgia then one of the interesting things about it is that georgians also eventually tobegan to embrace the idea of remembering and telling the story of what happened to that cherokee is always ge portrayed as tragedy is always pointed out as something to do with the iinjustice and equality, something fundamentally unfair about this and as you said georgians really through the early part of the 20th century began to craft a narrative about this, changed in many ways. My question wis this what is it about native American History what georgians have been able to embrace it, claim as their own and want to tell their story is one of injustice lyin ways that have not been the case when it comes to slavery or jim crow or even civil rights, what is it iabout the native story what happens in a lot of commemoration by nonnative peoples , for lack of a better term whats happening is that southern communities commemorate history as a way of treating themselves in places. It comes to that question of an important someplace so by commemorating a cherokee history northern georgia for example but what theyre doing is placing themselves more firmly in this landscape in a former indigenous complex. I find the use of native american historical images in nonnative culture at least in part as a way of reckoning with american place, with turning those places into homes for southern communities and their able to do this in part in a way that doesnt spark controversy because theres this assumption thatnative americans are gone. Either cherokee people and cherokee descendents all through this time and cherokee communities in northern carolina a lot of the culture starts with this assumption that native americans are gone as far as race isconcerned in the south , its this biracial landscape. As opposed to something more complex because you have this assumption of native american disappearance its permissible for settler communities to commemorate and even claws i apologize for r Something Like removal. And in doing so these are rituals that help i think settler communities become more home in these former indigenous homelands so one of the most surprising othings in my research was the extent to which removal commemoration didnt spark controversy even during times when states like georgia were actually battling against the blacks in an era of massive resistance, state of georgia is perfectly willing to commemorate removal at a place like a state Historic Site and even rain that asked the state does in the early 1960s as a kind of apology for the crimes of previous georgia governments. Some of the people the georgia politicians who support those commemorations are some of the people who are at the forefront of mass resistance movements, and thats permissible i think because theres this assumption that there isnt like a native american politics in georgia in the 1960s. Theres an assumption native American History in georgia and it with removal so that event is safe in a way that many other possible historical topics in Georgia History are not. So its an interesting kind of the dichotomy. Some of the same institutions and individuals who actively exclude africanamerican story from public history, from the public sphere are very willing to liembrace certain stories about the native american past, even stories of place previous generations in a very negative light. Good to park followup to that, is it possible to argue and it may not be that during the 60s its safer to see population no longer lives here as being white because of the racialpolitics going on with the civil rights movement. The way they view natives, romanticizing their past, whatever their doing are they seeing them as more links than non white some ways . In terms of the georgia commemorations theres probably a little bit of that as they play up this civilized tribe i mentioned and that has even though that image is tied to cherokee resistance to states like georgia and the United States is a very complementary image towards native American Culture. So theres an element of that that georgia commemoration and clearly whats going on when nonnative communities commemorate the Cherokee Nation more removal their identity with cherokees in that case, not presenting themselves as people who benefited from thedeportation of native americans. Theyre saying thats a shame it happened in the 19th century and american recognition is very clear there identifying with the cherokees as people who love these places in the way that White Communities now love these places so theres this possessiveness there. Taking possession of native American History, i ge translation into georgian heritage, a southern heritage. There is clearly an attempt to identify with a group of people who previous generations of georgia citizens have worked hard to destroy. You just mentioned one of the reasons why georgia was the narrative of commemoration is because natives are no longer here, they see on your oedoes that question of reparations ever enter into this here and is that because it doesnt seem to be just correct me if explains lobbyist where it does because what we hear about is very contentious controversial subject of reparations is the United States now owes reparations to the descendents of slaves and what you hear people say is i never owned any slaves, knows and no one said a slave for 150 years so no ones owed reparations but there are People Living in western North Carolina , is there any conversation of what our own reparations and there is that change the way people look memories were this subject and playing to romanticize. Thats an interesting question in commemorations themselves, there isnt really discussion in like the earlier part of the 20thcentury or even think a lot of ways in the present is this formal discussion of reparations. Commemoration itself becomes the reparation. Which is important because a lot of this narration recognizes historical misdeeds i guess in the part of the state of georgia, the United States that doesnt require much ofthe present. The other part of the question of reparations is in really an important sense, theres already and for a long time theres been a source in american law for addressing the sort of historic disregard of things like trees. Native americans can pursue what you might call reparations compensation recompense for violation of old trees. Both the Cherokee Nation na during the early part of the 19th century pursued recompense for violations of their trees so in this nation sense, this relationship, this political minute relationship between native americans and the United States there is a structure in place because of the treaty relationship for something that is in a different conversation, he contacts will look like reparations. The other thing i would say is that reparations or the responsibility in the present would logically take the form of nonnative government and nonnative communities supporting the work of tribal sovereignty. And so one of the things you do see in more recent commemorations that have been sponsored by or participated in by native nations is an insistence a sort of discussion of say removal early 19th century should be accompanied by first insistence that those nations have survived, they continued to exist not just as communities but part of the Political Landscape but then to also put an emphasis on native american sovereignty in the present. So thats always easy to get into these discussions of heritage but i think thats one of the one of the forms in which talking about responsibility of the present time to these historical memories, thatsone of the forms intake. One of the things and we got a lot of ground to cover in the short time we had left but theres things you touch him and im lyinghere. I thought it was fascinating you can think of when we when white georgians have commemorated this subject of removal of the cherokees they talk to asset operation a tragedy. Ask something that is the second part because its so unfair were unable to decided a lot three quote from when you said and sent her a version n of the trail of tears tends to define a removal a tragic error or acts of injustice. That is certainly reasonable but idefining removal as a mistake minimizes the significance of the disposition to the history of the United States. You basically go save this position not just in georgia where there have been a United States. This wasnt a mistake, foundational to the creation of United States. Is really both of those things, both of violation of american principles of equality and justice but also yes, of the foundation of the United States as the territorial entity so think of the United States as being on principles like separation and declaration of independence thats true of course but its also a physical thing and its all that is made of other peoples alliance, made out of other peoples territories. You only forget is part if you ask its said americans often do you define the confidence as wellness for the past this sort of open land as available for europeans they show up those two things are, those two definitions really be reconciled, they only did ellington section but its part of the foundation of the country so the Political Landscape of the United States as a territory would have to look very different if removal didnt take place. One of the things we often hear about today i guess is not necessarily about commemoration but certainly one of the ways in which nation native American Culture has brought native culture if you want to call it that, really symbolism into our mainstream is through the use of symbolism in sports. We see it in the case of universities, in terms of professional athletes, where indians have changed their name the next season to the cleveland guardians, right here in georgia are on Atlanta Braves game bright spotlight will always go winning the world series but once again , half if you can talk about very briefly not only the use of how that started, what it means for americans to do that, what about the tomahawk chop one of the questions we got into this is is what how do you decide, should be to charity what they were the creek or the sentinel what they think and does it matter . Is it good,is it bad . Big question and im short on time. Whether one should ask the question is yes but youre going to see a litany of opinions on americans here, i think its really whether you are in favor or oppose it at the leassimportant to acknowledge that those images , out of very old patterns of racialstereotyping. Thats go back very deep in American History and that are fundamentally high to colonialism. In terms of the atlanta baseball team, they brought that name with them when they to the 1960s i remember a baseball history correctly and im guessing that the when the team was back in the north that name was adopted in the early 20th century. This is the time when there are also romantic images of native americans paying through the culture, which are in some of the same assumptions about hearing, on an availability of those images to sports teams or universities is imminently rooted in colonialism, is rooted in a culture that emerges out of the historical experience of dispossession and deportation and assimilation politics and all the rest. So whether you are okay with those mascots or not, i think just as a point of history ndyou have to start by acknowledging where they come from and they come from colonialism. A lot of the activities that sort of follow from the adoption of those mascots reflect again very old patterns of nonnative americans playing indian, putting on face paint. You talk about the, haq shop and the music is used for that thing, bad westerns from the 20th century which early americans were playedby anthony quinn. This long tradition of universal stereotyping and you can argue in 2021 that it doesnt matter or shouldnt matter we live in of different world now. I argue with those mascots are acceptable now indisputable where those images come from they come from romantic racial stereotypes circulated throughout the19th century. While were talking about it , i a white male, youre a white male, native American History. Do you get perspective about questioning your authority on this subject is not an issue . Are you accepted as a specialist in a something that you are not . Is always an issue for me. As an academic, structures arent isolated from the political and racial history of the United States anyone v and other institutions are so in a very real way my position is, the term is coming a bit of a clichc now but its a bit of avillage. I had as a middleclass man i had opportunities were denied to native americans might believe you become someone who was supposedly an expert on this history that reflects colonialism as much as the Atlanta Braves mascot and it is an issue. I remember when i first arrived in western North Carolina being able to teach cherokee history classes and i have economic knowledge to that i found myself in cherokee place, where someone like their ancestors had thousands of years. And you know, a classroom in which supposedly i this newcomer at this newcomer from chicago im the one who supposedly is the expert. At one of the things teaching in this place taught me is that cherokee people dont need me to tell them their history. And it would be utterly arrogant for me to do that. That has, thats how i teach, is affected how i do my scholarship, is affected what we talk about your interest of my own writing andresearch. Cherokee history i suppose what its not a history of how native american images have circulated within a broader American Culture thats a deliberate choice on my part. What i can do to you i think is in some ways a complete critique of colonialism. I have and never claimed to be for cherokee history in this kind of monolithic way that cherokees dont need me to tell them what their history is. Aknowledge is there the other thing i would add is part of how our institution western North Carolina has responded is the two the colonial history of Higher Education has been as much is possible to what is our neighborhood as studies program are initiated a series of Strategic Partnerships with eastern focus on things like charity language so we really define what were doing as sort of honoring a set of, ideally honoring a set of obligations between the all university and the state of North Carolina. Obligations between the university which occupies the same place and the eastern band as a sovereign native american nation. Its always an issue and shouldnt necessarily be comfortable for me to act as if i simply speak for cherokee history because i dont. Real quick, what do you think based upon your study of this subject as a public and academic historians what is the proper way for us to commemorate and remember and thats the big question. This is these people in history. Im pretty sure i dont answer that i think whats the most interesting work going on today is rooted again in a set of partnerships between native nations who never went away and broader commemorative communities. Whether those are white dominated or nationalist institutions so the most important thing is for in this day and age for native nations, for native communities to be the mothers or at least the significant authors of this sort of work and not have to be something that simply other communities undertake. Because no matter how good that heritage work is, it becomes about the needs of nonnative communities. So most important thing is a power dynamic i guess. Just making sure that it is native American Communities that are direct in these sorts of commemorations, these operation partnerships at the power dynamic within public history shifts towards native nations and away from secular institutions. Edward denson is a professor at North Carolina, author of numerous books and articles on native American Dream including this one a Spy University class of 2017 where his societies award for in 18, we try appreciate you bringing some last into a big big subject. Is good talking with you. Want more about the Georgia History history. War. Or anything about Georgia Historical Society that you select for. A healthy democracy looks like this where americans can see democracy work. Get informed, straight from the source on cspan from nations capitalto where you are. The opinion that matters most is on this is what democracy looks like. Cspan, powered by cable. Campaign coverage is the to the president ial election watch meet and greets, speeches and events. To make up your own mind, campaign or on the cspan network are streamlined the online cspan. Org. Our topic today is were going to start with a discussion of nativeamericans. I want to make clear and were not talking about