Good morning, weve been talking about the effects of the American Revolution and framing that around the question of how revolutionary was the American Revolution . What kind of changes could it negotiate in american society, american law . Why should we think of the American Revolution as a revolution rather than a war for independence . And we talked about this in various frameworks. We talk about whether the revolution altered the social structure, and the last time we met were talking about the impact of the revolutionary on African Americans and on the institution of slavery. We saw in that case, the legacy was quite mixed. The revolution said the institution of slavery on the path of destruction in the northern states but was instrumental and trying to deepening and strengthening institutions in the southern states. Today, i would like to talk about two topics that are closely interrelated. And that our two sides of the same coin, i want to talk today about how the revolution affected native americans and how the revolution created a new system for making western lands available. And these are two sides of the same coin. On the one hand, the revolution initiated a new kind of commitment to pretty rapid westward expansion and a system of landholding and ownership, which was a very powerful engine of Economic Opportunity and democracy for a lot of ordinary white men and women and their families. But it also implied a pretty exploitative new approach to relations with native americans. So as i say, these are two sides of the same coin. To begin thinking about this in the most abstract sense, there were people involved in the American Revolution, and foremost among them, Thomas Jefferson who thought a great deal about this problem. Revolutionary aspects of the revolution ought to be making land more widely available to ordinary people relatively easy terms and this constituted a fundamental revolution in all european ways of thinking about the availability of land. Because in the old british system, in the old english system, land was a byproduct of aristocratic privilege and land holding was something that flowed from the top of society downward. In england, the land was owned by a relatively small number of people who owned a lot of it and they made it available on their own terms through rental agreements, you know, if you think about the fuel system this is a system where attendance farm the lands of great lords and its a system that really, where Land Ownership and the power associated with it all resides at the top of society, and that principle was woven into the fabric of colonization, because if you think about how lands became available until colonies, the biggest colonies began with proprietary ownership. If you think about a colony like pennsylvania the first principle of pennsylvania is the king gives all the land to william penn and tells him he can do whatever he wants with it. This is an offshoot of that same aristocratic model where land starts at the top and is distributed downward according to whatever principles the powerful people who control it want to employ. We talked last week about the fact that far from seeing that stuff die away, we talked about the idea of a feudal revival. There were a lot of absentee landowners that had control of a lot of land and they were beginning to assert their privileges more strongly. They were collecting rents in a way they couldnt in an earlier period so this idea of kind of land being tied to privilege, the privilege of a small number of powerful men, just foundational. Not only in English Society but to the way colonies were organized, and for jefferson, this was one of the most important things that needed to be overturned. We talked about his attack on trying to break up the greatest states of the most powerful family. This is kind of a parallel idea. One of jeffersons cornerstone principles is the idea that the best social foundation for a republican government was to have a large number of yeoman farmers who owned rel small, relatively similar amounts of land in fee simple meaning they did not pay rent to landlords. They held the land on their own terms. So this idea of a society, a republic of yeoman farmers was one of the foundational principles that many people, especially including jefferson, wanted to work pretty hard to implement after the American Revolution. The problem is, of course, making abundant amounts of land widely available on cheap terms means you have to control the land in the first place, and this was not that simple. Because, of course, the land that the United States aspired to control and redistribute were lands that were occupied by native american populations, with their own claims, with their own sense of legitimacy, and in the process of trying to enact this theoretical revolution and the availability of land, what we see is the United States took a very exploitive approach to its relationship with native peoples throughout eastern north america. Thats a process that began in the revolution itself, and in order to kind of focus our discussion of this issue, i want to focus on the ohio country and ohio indians. There were indian populations up and down the eastern seaboard in the appalachian west and there were a lot of different stories associated with these groups, but for our purposes, just to focus on one of these groups i want to focus on the ohio country, which weve already talked about, because the ohio valley was the focus of lord dunmores war in 1774. Weve already talked about european aspirations to control the ohio country and dunmores effort basically to claim kentucky, whats now kentucky, from the shawnees through his victory in dunmores war. The ohio country population is kind of in interesting and complicated population because in the early 18th century, the ohio valley was largely de populated for complicated historical reasons. In decades before the American Revolution, it was being repopulated by a pretty large and Diverse Group of indians that were coming both from the east, from pennsylvania and new jersey and new york, and coming from the north and the west. So from the east, groups that were basically being displaced by the growth of pennsylvania, new jersey, and were new york worth three populations in particular, the delawares and shawnese, were migrating west out of pennsylvania and new jersey, and the western iroquois. The name they were given in the ohio country these groups or forming in many cases shared communities. The most important communities in the ohio valley were often multiple ethnic communities, and they were moving into the ohio valley both to move away from the immediate pressures of the growth of colonial settlement and also because the ohio valley was a really good place to hunt and trade. Pennsylvania traders startedstarted traveling in the ohio valley. As they moved in to the ohio valley. Pennsylvania traders followed them and they had a pretty robust set of Economic Opportunities in the 1740s and 1750s and 1760s, so you have these groups moving in from the east. At the same time, again, in response to the Economic Opportunity created by traders from pennsylvania, a pretty wide array of groups from the north and west that were moving out of the french sphere and into british sphere in the 17 forties and fifties including white house triple oz put a lot of knees and others. Relatively diverse population of native groups and so the main thing i want you to understand, when we talk about the ohio indians were talking about a diverse array of peoples that had not functioned together, they were not a coherent political unit. They had not operated together for a very long time at the time of the revolution, and the revolution forced them to make new kinds of collective choices in response to the pressures of that war. They had relied on a pattern of trade with pennsylvania. And alliance with both pennsylvania and really with each other for a number of years without really having further coalesced as any kind of political unit. And then this was the group, of course, that was directly attacked by virginia militia in dunmores war in 1774, particularly the shawnese, who dunmore thought was the most hostile of these groups, and the shawnese were engaged, and that was one battle at Point Pleasant in 1774. You remember, that dunmores war established the principle, at least in the minds of virginians that kentucky was now open to settlement. So one of the oddities of the American Revolution is that, in the spring and summer of 1775, this is at the same time that the shot heard around the world was fired at lexington, at concord, rather, battle of lexington and concord, battle of bunker hill. At the same time, all of that stuff was going on in new england, in central kentucky parties of virginians were moving into this newly claimed land, in 1775, and without permission from the crown, without any legitimate authority from above, but having participated in dunmores war in 1774, dozens, hundreds of people began to occupy central kentucky in the spring and summer of 1775. This is a map that just, i just want to take a minute to look at, so im sure that you have a vision of what were talking about. Im talking about the ohio country, and this is actually a map that depicts battles during and after the American Revolution, but when we talk about the ohio country im basically talking about this area mostly north of the ohio river. Heres where the three rivers come together at fort pitt, to define the head waters of the ohio. This is the ohio country, and then kentucky the territory that people were beginning to occupy in 1775 and 1776, is down here. You can see some of these early stations. Boones borough as one of the early kentucky stations rattles in myrtle stations this became the leading edge of Anglo American settlement even before there was an American Revolutionary war. This is something, its a process thats moving forward independent of the revolution, yet it intersects with the revolution and the revolution fundamentally changes the fortunes of these people who will moving west, because, under the auspices of the crown they were criminals. They were beyond the proclamation line of 1763. What they were doing was illegal. But under, you know, in the context of the American Revolution, as the Second Continental Congress was sitting, as revolutionary legislators were taking over in the states, it was possible for them to make new claims to legitimacy and thats exactly what these kentucky settlers did. In the course of the American Revolution, these kentucky settlers made common cause with the United States. And with the revolutionary governments that managed them. And they made very specific pleas about the legitimacy of their occupation and settlement. They specifically talked about the fact that the king had limited, had restricted access to these western lands, but that they had fought and bled for these lands at the battle of Point Pleasant. They had a legitimate and meaning claim to these lands. And moreover, they were also interested in liberty and they thought what the United States was talking about was pretty great and they wanted to be part of it and they said the United States would be foolish to miss the opportunity to incorporate such skilled rifleman into their ranks. They petitioned their congress and said, if you support us out here well fight for you and keep the native peoples off of your backs. So they made the case that in addition to the fact that they adhered to the same principles of liberty that the United States did, they also made a strategic argument, that they could be very useful allies, and that was an argument that got traction. It got traction with the new revolutionary state of virginia which began arming and supporting their little fort. The communities that were settled all took a form of Something Like this where cabins were built and a circle with palisades so the community became kind of a makeshift fort because these guys recognized from the beginning that they were operating in territory where they would be regarded as hostile invaders, and it was incumbent upon them to defend themselves against both native americans that might not want them there, and also, as the war progressed against, you know, the pressures of british arms as well, one of the key people involved, let me ask you this. When you think of daniel boone, do you think of him as a person from the American Revolution. Hes familiar, everyone knows who he was. Great american frontiersman, right . In the era of Davey Crockett but its weird because daniel boone and Davey Crockett are generations apart. Davey crockett was at the hello. How alamo. Were talking about 1775. This is when, this is when Daniel Boones most single most famous act of pioneering took place. He led a party of settlers in the wake of dunmores war through the center gap and one of the cumberland gap. One of the first towns founded in kentucky was founded in 1775. So its weird to think of daniel boone as a revolutionary war hero. His most famous act occurred before the United States even existed. Its fascinating that we dont you know, in our popular imagination we dont place him in time here. We dont think of the American Revolution as a pioneering era but its the first pioneering era and the first intrepid western explores slash occupiers. You know swung into action in the revolution and kentucky. Ill say more about daniel boone in minute but hold that thought and just to kind of talk quickly about the war experience in central kentucky. The various communities of central kentucky petitioned both the Virginia Legislature and the Continental Congress for support, and they received that support the Virginia House of delegates, first of all, extended its jurisdiction across all of whats now kentucky. It created a great big new western county so that those new communities in central kentucky would have, you know, kind of a framework for government. And it started sending regular supplies of powder and lead, so that these settlements could defend themselves. The Continental Congress also responded favourably to these petitions. Beginning in july of 1776 the Continental Congress manned and supplied three new forts in the ohio river. That were designed basically to protect and support these new kentucky settlements. During the fall and winter of 1776, it sent two tons of powder, four tons of lead, boats to carry 1500 men and food to support 2000 people for six months. Thats a fair amount of war material that the Continental Congress was providing to kentucky at a very early stage. And then when conditions deteriorated in the fall in spring,. ,. ,. Getting relationships with both the british and the americans the couldve led them in either direction. Initially both governments hope that they would remain neutral and u. S. Leaders will plead with them just to stay out of the revolution. They told him used an internal spat but it became clear quickly than in fact, the ups or putting a lot of pressure on their territory so gradually by the 1777 a Large Coalition of ohio indians had decided that their interests lay with the british empire. With the efforts of the british to defeat the americans and they began fighting against the kentucky settlements with british support, and so from 1777 on, most of the ohio indians found themselves aligned with the british. Even though you know from that article we read a little earlier in the semester about why guys in the delawares, there was a period where white eyes and large fractions of delawares thought that the maybe their best bet was to land them selves with the United States. A settlements really helped to change that dynamic for them. The war ended in 1783, the fighting ended in 1781 but the war was formally conclude in 1783 with the treaty of paris. One of the wellknown facts about this treaty in this documented a find peace between Great Britain and the United States, no mention was made of britains native american allies. They just simply, the native population of north america is simply not a subject of a treaty of paris of 1783. This meant that the United States could interpret the significance of this treaty for native peoples anyway that it wanted to. And it shows, the United States chose to interpret the treaty of paris where britain basically says we lost the war, the United States interpreted this treaty to extend to britains native allies and in fact to all the native peoples in the near east, whether we are aligned with Great Britain, neutral or whether allied with the United States. In the case of some indians for example, it didnt help them at all in the post war period that they had been an ally of the u. S. During the war. So the logic a victory in the revolution for the United States meant that not only had Great Britain been defeated but all of the native peoples of the near Eastern Region of the trans appalachian west had been defeated by dissension. The ohioans did not accept this premise. In fact the ohio indians had never been defeated themselves in the course of the American Revolution. They were still in a pretty strong position in 1783. Kentucky was still starting to grow a lot faster but it was still embattled, and they simply did not accept the logic that the u. S. Applied to the treaty of paris. And so at the end of the war everything was unclear in terms of relations between the u. S. And the ohio indians, and in the sense it, was a similar situation. U. S. Relation with indian groups throughout the trans appalachian west. I want to just positives point to talk a little bit about danya boone, because placing him in kentucky in 1775 is a little bit surprising. You know if you dont know a lot about him, havent thought very much about dana boone i want to talk for a minute about how daniel bloom first became famous. Because he became a famous figure right after the revolutionary war. He became famous as a result of the publication of this text. John fell since discovery and settlement of kentucky. John philistine was a land speculator in promoter who was interested and encouraging the rapid occupation of kentucky. Filson a year after the signing of the treaty of the piracy thomas this book in the discovering settlement of kentucky. Its kind of interesting. It narrative story the occupation of kentucky and its experiences in revolution and it includes independents, entitled the adventures of colonel daniel boone containing a narrative of the wars in kentucky and occluded this little biography will appendix. Including this illustration that shows daniel boone with his rifle and his hunting dog. The earliest depiction of boone, and the purpose of this wall the purpose of the pamphlet was to promote settlement in kentucky in the purpose of the panics to talk about danya boone was both to describe his heroism and harrowing experience of the war and also to stress that those experiences were now over. And so daniel boone became this kind of deep in the First American pioneering hero. And his fame took off rather quickly. He became famous even in his own lifetime. This is the first portrait baited of boone. This was painted late in his life by a man named chester harding. Its a well known image of boone later in life. There is another early unattributed painting depicting him. Its interesting to look at the clothing in these portraits. What strikes you about this one . What do you see . What is he wearing . Hes wearing a lot of furs, they spent a lot of times in the first trading areas in the west. Rather than just being settled in the east, hes wearing a lot of leather, carrying a rifle, it looks like hes armed to go out and take on the frontier rather than in the perjury looks more like more of a chance on, and scholarly type of individual. Yes. You see the fur trim in the suit of clothes. You can also see the leather leggings and the coat. The code is stitched together this is obviously not factory may clothing. You can also see his trademark skin cap already in his hand, as well as hunting equipment. Hes got a powder horn around his shoulder and rifle. This portrait does seem to depict him as more as an urbane gentlemen versus a later period. This is not fancy clothing, but he does seem to be wearing ordinary suit of clothes with a white collar shirt. This depiction begins to i think, take on some of the familiar trappings of daniel boone is a mythic figure in American Culture where the College Shirt and will jacket that we saw on the previous portrait has been replaced by a fringed, buckskin jacket. It is unclear what kind of sureties warm, but its not a fancy one. The most famous depiction of daniel boone of the 19th century is this painting was done by george caleb being him in the 18 fifties. Mangum is one of the great genre painters of the 19th century. Relief youre not familiar with his work i recommend checking it out. He did a lot of really interesting stuff. This is one of his most famous paintings. Danya boone escorting the settlers through the cumberland gap. So in 1851, 1852, he is depicting something that had occurred for generations earlier. This is a much later painting. What strikes you about this depiction of daniel boone . And of the party he was leaving . What do you see here . I think choosing to portray the party coming out of the shadows into the light. A light of entering the new land, but in the end of a still more of the new, unexplored and the beginning of an era i suppose. If you want to put it. Away now that is really well said. It definitely does have the sense of coming out of darkness into light. And if you think that is historical as well as geographical is very useful. This is a dangerous wilderness that these people are traversing. You can see by the blasted tree, the threatening weather, the craggy rocks and just by how dark everything is. You see this oarsmen in the background. I think thats a sore, presumably fending off enemies, probably hostile native people. His party was attacked by native warriors. What else . A woman on the horse is reminiscent of virgin mary it seems would suggest that maybe a Divine Providence smiling down on this act. Yeah exactly. This female figure has clearly echoing traditional artistic depictions of mary, the virgin mary so there is yes the idea of Divine Providence at work in this emigration for sure. Ive really have a really different interpretation of this guy in the back he was elevated looks like a crop. It could be a crop. It could be driving livestock forward. Thats true. Im not sure which it is. The tie these two contests together, theres a great song walking through the shadowy folly of death, and theyre coming through this shadowy valley walking confident in the Divine Providence, and coming into the light walking. Does make you think of the 23rd psalm walk through the valley the shot of death. Of shelf hear no evil. What about . Boom. Ceramic did you want to Say Something . I just want to say its interesting to see you can civilly clearly see the perspective of the artist in this how it seems like the parties the saving grace that will save kentucky and make it so much better. They dont seem to be struggling even though there are all the wood around them and like you pointed out how the wilderness it was. It seems like like we were going to come through this no problem. Yeah, yeah thats a good point. They are surrounded by dangerous, but they dont seem to be they do seem to be apart from the danger. Yeah. And bringing a new kind of civilized existence into the wilderness. What about daniel boone himself . What would you say about the way he is depicted. ,. ,. ,. ,. ,. ,. This is another painting that i could not find an inscription form, but this is an interesting variation on the begum depiction. And i think it is correct characteristic of mid to late 20th century values associated with the same process. What strikes you here in contrast . How would you say this painting difference from being in this painting into picking enterprise of westward expansion . On the first picture of light was really shining on boone. Heres a light is on everybody. You can see it all the way across. Yeah the. Light is on everybody so its more of a democratic depiction. What about the natural setting . Its a lot softer. The light is been light flowing through the trees. Looks like a lot easier for them in that in the first. Painting look softer, looks easier. Its a cathedral of nature, its not a howling wilderness. That seems to me to capture a lot between the difference of 19th and century and 20th century so sensibilities on the benign glories in nature. There are no benign glories in the begum painting. Its interesting to think about why boone is misplaced in our imaginations, why we tend to confuse him with a sort of davie crock it era. I do have one theory and this might not relate at all to your generation. It relates to mine. When i was a kid i can fees danya boone with david croc it. He wore the law he wore the say. They were almost the same costume for both roles. This is what i blame my confusion on that i think more fundamentally we dont really think that the era of the revolution as being an air of westward expansion, but it really is. And in fact, in the experience of those early kentucky settlements, the American Revolution legitimizes. Westward expansion, a kind of unbridled form of western expansion this is the map that is printed that john phils in filson that that book about kentucky. What strikes about this . Image if you were, i dont know renting landing new jersey income contemplating the possibility of moving to kentucky. What would this image tell you about what to expect in kentucky . Its empty. Theres no divisions to stop and land. It looks like open land. If you look carefully youll see a lot of those early settlements, but there is a lot of open space. Yeah what else . It seems to me like theres a lot of detail on the river networks. Theres not a lot of detail on a whole lot else, which to me would tell me they dont really know whats out there. They know who controls a lamb, that they dont know what is out there anymore than anyone else does so i dont know what im getting into if i actually buy land out there. Yeah, yeah its true. There are not a lot of political demarcations. But i think the point hes started with is the point i would emphasize the most, which is if you are a farmer, what you want as well water for the land. This is a picture of what appears to be extraordinarily well watered fertile land. In fact it is, if you know kentucky bluegrass this is a great place to be a farmer. And filson is basically in this pamphlet and in this map, hes throwing the doors of peoples imaginations open to the possibility of settling in kentucky. So it is an interesting question. A, did it work . And be, if you fall filson advice and move their, what would your experience be . And the answer is, man it was complicated. People who took up land and early kentucky stumbled into a kind of nightmarish set of problems associated with land distribution. And the problems are really embodied in the Virginia Land ordinance of 1779. Remember, i said virginia extended its jurisdiction all over kentucky and created a new western county. Someone 1779, the Virginia House of delegates passed a law that set out the terms by which people could claim land in this new western county. And it was really complicated. The first thing about the Virginia Land ordinance of 1779 was that a cave priority route to settlers rather than speculators. So this he can see had a revolutionary impulse to make sure some rich guy who never goes out there does not get control of all the land. It gave priority to people who would actually settle the land, but it created a bewildering an extensive process that they had to follow in order to gain kyle. And so, the process was multi stage. First of all, the first thing had to do he had to go to kentucky kentucky in order to have a legitimate claim because it gave priority to settlers. But, then once he gone to kentucky and the next thing you have to do is go back to richmond in order to pay the fees that would allow you to claim the lands that you had already visited. So you would go to the Treasures Office enrichment to pay a patent fee, get a treasures receipt and to the Auditors Office where you would get the treasures you see then we go to land offices weather receive an certificate entitle you to a land more and then with the land more in hands you can return to kentucky. And in kentucky register with the county server and i have a land surveyed. So you go first of all to kentucky to find it where you want to be in the first place, then you go back to richmond and go back to this elaborate steps series of steps enrichment to get all the legal papers they need to go back to kentucky, and then you have to get it to hire a survey or to do a survey. This is a lot of people were doing this at the same time theres no system in place and kentucky to make sure that any this occurs in in an orderly way. Then the survey are edges you a certificate along with an adorned warrant, and then you can go back to richmond to receive a land title. This is impossible. Nobody can do this right. So what happened in the course of the revolution, expect especially after the revolution, very quickly a lot of people went to kentucky and chaos ensued. The population of kentucky rose very slowly as long as there was active fighting going on and it ebbed and flowed during the warriors, but in 1783, there were 12,000 people in kentucky. 1783 is the date of the treaty of paris. After that point, arose fast. And 1790, there were hundred thousand people in kentucky. By 1800, 220,000 people, 40,000 of them enslaved. This is obviously a rapid pattern of population growth. If you look at what resulted from all these people going to a place that had a ban land distribution system, early history of kentucky as a state features legal documents with a lot of pictures like this. laughter this is a plaque that was made by hancock taylor. Im not sure which one this is. Near the falls of ohio, near louisville kentucky, that shows all the other claims that overlapped and competed with hers. The early history of kentucky was a history of nonstop litigation over survey problems like this. But this kind of problem is woven into the structure of that land distribution, ordinance of 70 79. Which the Kentucky Legislature i mean avenge Virginia Legislature thought they were creating a system would be fair and american democratic. Because he had to do all the stuff in the right order yet, to do it in the right way, but nobody can do actually what the statue describes effectively, or many people cant, so what you get is chaos on the ground. So its with this in mind that people like Thomas Jefferson in the 17 eighties who are rethinking and fundamental ways the problem of land distribution and this is a process, a reconceptualization process that coordinated northwest ordinance of 1787. I asked you to read not about the northwest ordinance of 1787 but the Land Ordinance of 1784 and the jefferson papers. The editors of the jefferson papers of a really good essay on the evolution of thinking about western lands that lasted to take a look at. There are a lot of details ordinance of 1784 that got modified for the Land Ordinance of 1787. But what in your reading of that essay in the jefferson papers, what particularly struck you as the main Takeaway Points let the editors emphasize and describing this process of developing a land system do you remember any key points, particularly folks kissing on jefferson and his evolving fought about the trans appalachian, the part of that u. S. Territory beyond the bounds of the existing states . I think that editors might have diluted what jefferson was trying to get across. I think jefferson was radical and thinking they should settle the lands and get it over with. But really want to look at that land this extra resources, and not just put it off and say, we cant keep expanding. That is interesting. Yeah. So you think that essay dilutes the radicalism of jeffersons intention . Yeah, you can see jeffersons thought evolving. Initially, they talk about the fact that he is considering one or a couple of western states, and eventually this evolves into this is a map. There is no map in jeffersons hands of his intentions. But there is a surviving map of the jefferson hardly map, that they talk about from 1784. One of the things that jefferson had add mind and lots of people had in mind, thomas payne had a pamphlet about the importance of this. All of the cotton colonies that had claims to western lands that extended far into the interior, virginia was advantaged in this. Certain colleagues were advantaged in this. The first thing that jefferson and others believed that was important to have was all of the individual states seed their western land claims to the United States. The United States would collectively deal with all of them together. You can see that jefferson imagined western boundaries, including a pretty aggressive western boundary for the state of pennsylvania, to open up these lands to new settlements. And then you can see by 1784, jefferson has imagined the possibility of 14 different and new western states. And both allowed ordinance of 1784 and of 1787, they are very conscious of the kinds of problems that Virginia Land ordinance created. They want to have a system of that will allow for rapid westward expansion. Uniform surveys, public sales are principles that are woven into these ordinances. And then the thing that is most famous, most noteworthy, and also most easily overlooked by americans. Because we take it for granted the territorial system. What do i mean by this phrase territorial system . What is a territorial system . Is it like, areas with less than a certain population that cant be incorporated into states until they reach a certain number. And technically there are some states in the u. S. Today that would not have reached that number. I think a tech is one of them. Kentucky is big enough to be estate. That is true you cannot become estate until you reach a certain population. It creates a territorial status. And that is to say, an area that is governed by the federal government but does not have state status. And then in the northwest territories, 60,000 people reside in the territory, then they can, you know, gather together and apply for statehood status. This is so unusual. It is really contrary to, for example, the british mola ball of contact name your colony, virginia, but there will never become a time when its going to be part of Great Britain. It is permanently colony. This is a crazy idea to invasion for a nation made up of states, to envision this kind of elastic, elastic western boundary, elastic number of states. Jefferson has drawn a map in which new but not yet existing states outnumber the original 13 states of the United States. What nation would do this to itself . It is a very strange idea, right . To have woven into the fabric of the constitution a system that allows for the indefinite expansion of the nation through space, and the creation of additional political units that have the power over time to overwhelm the original, the political units, the states that originally made up the country. I have a question about the expansion parts. What did france, spain, or Great Britain think of this map . This very clearly incorporates territories that they had supposedly claimed, like the northwest or southwest on there. Thats right. And it became, the United States had to worry a lot about the hostility of foreign powers in the early decades of its existence. Even in territories that had been seated to the United States by Great Britain by the treaty of paris in 1783, britain continue it never gave up its western post in the Great Lakes Region and it continued to harass or encourage native allies to harass settlements, 1812, you know, a British Assault on american sovereignty on multiple fronts at once. Similarly, in the southeast spain in particular. Challenged american sovereignty over the southeast. And other people considered conspiring. Actually a lot of people who settled in kentucky spent some time, people like john severe, spent some time thinking about whether a Spanish Alliance would serve them better than one with the United States. The u. S. Had a real problem. This map is envisioning a system that would encourage the rapid occupation of settlements, these gigantic New Territories of lands. But as people take up the challenge or the promise of that possibility, there is very good possibility that the United States would not be the superintendent power. There is a periods in the early Republic Wind a lot of people in the southwest were more interested in, or as interested as spain is a possible ally. Wasnt the organ territory i may be overstepping the bounds of this class of it, but wasnt oregon split we between britain and the United States for a good long time . The oregon country was split. And there was no it was not clear until the 18 forties that the boundary would be resolved without a fight. But originally, the dividing line between u. S. And british claims in oregon was fuzzy just because the treaty of paris didnt really draw the line that far out. This territorial system, i want to stress, this is a very radical system. A radical thing. There is no real clear precedent for a nation inventing a system for occupying New Territory in this way. The idea that new states would be admitted on the same footing as old states is particularly striking. Ultimately what you see in these provisions is the creation of an elastic nation. Here is a map that shows the Northwest Territory as it is ultimately created in 1787. This is a map that stance. In 1787, this was an act of the Second Continental Congress. This was before the constitution had even been drafted. This is at a port where the United States has still and infant, illdefined nation. And this map stands as open invitation to people who are interested in westward expansion and moving on to new lands on easy terms. It is an open invitation that the United States is somehow going to oversee and guarantee that process. The idea of a kind of uniform public land distribution was partly, it was partly undermined by a more complicated set of arrangements in the revolutionary period. Because in an ideal sense, jefferson thought that it would be great to have this sort of blank slate where you could ensure some kind of open public access. But in fact, congress had all kinds of reasons to favor and support other kinds of purchases, particularly because Congress Needed money and was always willing to take shortcuts with western lands. At the same time, that it was inventing the territorial system, it was also proceeding with other kinds of private sales. For example, in 1787, it sold 5 million acres of land to the ohio company of new england. This was a company that was made up of former officers of the continental army. This 5 million acres became the original core settlements of the new state of ohio. That group subcontracted a sale of about 1 million acres to a second company, we sold over 300,000 acres to a guy named john cleaves in 1788. And at the same time, connecticut was claiming lands that resulted in a socalled western reserve of 3. 3 6 million acres. The point of this is to say, even at the same time that congress was trying to map out this uniform system, it was also sowing confusion in various ways by allowing other groups to purchase or claim lands on their own terms. And there is the problem of officer warrants, which also gave Army Officers a claim to western lands. And two state officers as well. That results in the creation of the Virginia Military district of 4. 2 million acres and a u. S. Military district of 2. 5 million acres. It is interesting, because we think of the northwest ordinance of being a clear and clean set of provisions about how western lands will be occupied. But at the very same time that congress is formulating that policy, it is also hastily disposing of gigantic parcels on different terms in the west. And so, in the fall of 1787, Congress Also auctioned off 73,000 acres in the First Federal range under the terms of the northwest ordinance. All of this stuff is Going Forward together at the same time, resulting in a map of ohio that did not yet exist at this point. But this is a map of the modern state of ohio that shows all of these things laid out in relation to each other. The ohio company purchase, the u. S. And Virginia Military districts. The seems purchase, the connecticut western reserve, and a seven range is being surveyed under the terms of the northwest ordinance. This is a kind of chaotic system. And by the way, every inch of that ground was claimed by some combination of native peoples who still had a legitimate claim to control that land. What this meant because the United States was so enthusiastic about western land, who is proceeding on all of these fronts at once because it desperately needed the money that western land could produce. This meant that it had to deal very hastily and expeditiously with a very large and complex population that occupied the ohio country. As i said, they believe that they have won any battles that had fought in the American Revolution. So the United States implemented a series of what can only be described as sham trees. I often say the indians were cheated in the treaty making process. The truth is that different treaties have different stories and some were very legitimate enterprises. But this was a series of sham treaties, where in most cases, the United States did not have legitimate representatives of the indian nations they were trying to deal with. There was liqueur involved, coercion involved. First of those treaties was the treaty of fort stand wicks, right after the treaty of paris and 1784. Representatives of the Continental Congress raced up to new york in upstate, trying to get there before new yorks own representatives could get there to deal with the iroquois confederacy. The treaty affords time looks this is one of the treaties in which native representatives president explicitly said that they did not have the authority to sign any binding document. But the United States presented them with the doctrine that they had been defeated as a result of the british defeat, and insisted that they seed all of their claims to land in the ohio country and they got a document that was contested from the air quite from the very beginning. Something very similar happen at the treaty of Fort Mcintosh in 1785. And in delaware the treaty of fort finneas 17 its 86 dealing with the chinese. Ultimately, congress came to recognize that these treaties were so problematic that they tried to organize a single treaty meeting at four caramel in 1789 they would bring together representatives of all the indians in one mass gatherings. Again United States walked away with a signed document, but from the perspective of the native and americans who attended, it was completely chaotic and again, they contested the outcome. So in that context of those failed treaties in the background, from 1787 until 1794, United States was back at war with the ohio indians. This was a war really was the First Military undertaking for the new United States army. The first function of the u. S. Army was to the trident feet this coalition of ohio indians, which the United States had failed a bargain with it in the form of treaties. In which the United States really needed to get out of the way and then proceed with its western land enterprise. Arthur st. Clair was the first commander of American Forces in the ohio country. He did not do very well. 1789 and 70 91 he suffered major defeats. He was succeeded in his camp and by Anthony Wayne, so called mad Anthony Wayne who had more success and finally defeated in a fairly decisive fashion the Ohio Coalition at the battle of fall long timbers in 1794. After that battle the ohio indians signed the treaty of greenville to bring an end to the conflict and agreed to sign away some of their lands, so the treaty of greenville is the first treaty in the ohio country that was the product not of negotiations but of warfare. The Ohio Coalition agreed to sign away a big chunk of the modern state of ohio, and also part of indiana. So you can see that the result of this warfare was to basically allow the United States to claim control of most of the territories that we just talked about that they had in fact already arranged for the sale and settlement. This pattern of really rapid westward expansion without regard for native territorial claims in a process that really accelerated violence between the United States and native americans and rapid dispossession of native lands. This series of experiences in 17 eighties and 17 nineties really in many ways sets the pattern that the United States falls for a really long time to come right. On because the u. S. Soon comes to believe that not only would be really great to settle east of mississippi but that this was a nation with a continental destiny, a manifest destiny to overspread the continent. And that was a doctrine that worked very hard on the interests of native peoples throughout north america. The u. S. Now look at this is an ineffective way to deal with it. They looked at it up into the Industrial Revolution . Right off the good question to this is an effective way to deal with the eye. Think they increasingly on effect this is the only way to deal with native americans, because of the fact that the u. S. Was invested in such a rapid form of territorial expansion that it could not really take native claims to territories seriously. The flip side of the story is the story of not only warfare against indians and sham treaties, but also the fact that the United States chose to perpetuate european doctrines about the idea that native americans did not really own the land. That european claimed superseded native american claims. Thats the famous discovery doctrine. European crowns from the 16th century forward would say that for example, you can divide up north america along munn france and britain and spain based on who discovered what. The presence of native americans was only incidental. It wouldve been for the United States in the era of all men are created equal to say, that discovery doctrine is pretty problematic and we really ought to think putting the claims of people who are already on the ground on a different footing and treating them more fairly, more respectfully. But thats not the doctrine that evolved in the United States. Instead, the doctrine that evolved in United States, the Marshall Court and the 18 twenties and thirties explicitly says and a couple of important treaty documents, it explicitly says that the european doctrine of discovery remains in force. And its funny because marshall is sometimes being used by this doctrine. But he says, this is just the way its always been done in this way were still doing. At the two most famous cases, which took it cited all the time in this context are johnson be mcintosh, which involved land sales between pack and shaw indians who decided in 1823, and for the first time chief Justice John Marshall says the discovery doctrine that european crowds used in earlier centuries still the doctrine that holds today. And he described the piano shaw s in this opinion has perpetual inhabitants with the menu diminutive rights and goes on to say to describe him as an inferior race of people without the privileges of citizens and under the perpetual protection into tillage of the government. In order to justify the perpetuation of the discovery doctrine, he also needs to characterize them as racially distinct an inferior in american law. The same kind of idea as further articulated in the same as Cherokee Nation case in 1831, where marshall coined the phrase domestic dependent nations to describe the legal status of indians, which is a weird phrase. Domestic dependent. Its unclear how you could be a nation but also dependent. A nation implies sovereignty, but domestically dependence implies no sovereignty. And in fact thats the kind of contradiction inherent in that phrase, it is really at the heart of the legal status of the modern reservation system that continues to govern the relationship between Indian Tribes and the United States. So yeah, its it is interesting. When we step back from this and think about and return to the question of, what did the American Revolution evolution mean for native americans . Was the American Revolution revolutionary for native americans . No not really. And doctrine all terms it was the opposite. A perpetuated a doctrine regarded them as less legitimate claimants to territory. It was revolutionary only in the sense that put into place a set of mechanisms for National Expansion that dramatically accelerated the means by which they could be dispossessed. Through violence, through a treaty making, through a kind of inexorable territorial expansion that had a logic of its own, that ignore the legitimacy of native claims. Any other questions . Thoughts before we finish for today . Domestic then nations, we talked about this in a class in high school. About how columnist would only natives with weaponry they would learn to hunt with rifles through this used they would depend on the colonists for ammunition, for gunpowder, i think it just described domestic dependent nations very well. That idea of dependency that has to do with the idea that native communities communities came to depend on european manufacturers as a concept anthropologists have and historians have developed. I think that in this case, what marshall meant by the pen it was not dependent on european manufacturers. I think what he means is dependent on american law that is to say, they are not independent. They cannot run their own affairs. There are the pan and sense that what do United States says goes. If you think about the reservation system it is still true. They have certain limited autonomy, but they are dependent on the United States and cannot act independently as nations. That i see is a domestic dependent nation. Its still the way native american tribes, thats the official federal term, its still the way that the american tribes operate in relation to the United States. All right, i think thats everything for. Today i will see you on wednesday and we will talk about virtue, gender and citizenship. Weeknights this month, were featuring American History tv programs as a preview for whats available every weekend on cspan three. On tuesday, university of maryland professor Christopher Bonn or teaches a class about the concept of power in antebellum slave society. He explores the different ways owners and enslaved people exerted or express their will. A look at how these dynamics plays then played out on plantations. He also discusses how the invention of cotton gin and the resulting expansion of both slavery and the cotton industry if elected the relationship between owners and. Slave watched tuesday night beginning at eight eastern. Echo and enjoy American History tv this week every weekend on cspan three. Now on American History tv clemson history professor see thompson teaches a class about the preamble of the declaration of independence. He explores what the Founding Fathers what may have intended by their word choices. Good afternoon everybody