Being and Becoming Ute: The Story of an American Indian People

Abstract

Sondra G. Jones'sBeing and Becoming Ute: The Story of an American Indian People is the first comprehensive history of the Núu-ci, or “The People” (8). It is a cultural biography and history of the Núu-ci people that begins with their creation story and moves through hundreds of years of Núu-ci history. Jones highlights the resiliency and adaptation of a people from contact and into the twenty-first century. Ute survivance in the twenty-first century is the result of their ability to respond and adapt to external forces that advocated for their removal and erasure. Being and Becoming Ute spans over four hundred years of complex Ute history, and Jones's methodical approach highlights the diversity and resiliency of a people. Ute people have defined the future of their people on their own terms as an exercise of tribal sovereignty. As a comprehensive book about Ute peoples, Jones takes on this formidable task in this career-defining book. Her book will be foundational to any future scholars writing about Núu-ci people, Mormons in Utah, and the larger American West.One of the strengths of this monograph is the source material. Jones visited and worked alongside Ute people, including tribal historians, leaders, community peoples, and elders, to better understand Utes’ worldviews and history. Her use of oral histories further strengthens her book. However, this is also one of the weaknesses of the book; Jones does not use a Ute, or Indigenous, theoretical framework to “read” these sources. It is important to acknowledge that Jones worked with Núu-ci people, but this book largely relies on the written accounts of non-Núu-ci people. For example, Jones begins the second chapter outlining the history of the Núu-ci people “at an arbitrary point in time. . . . By looking at what was, we can better appreciate who the Ute people became, both within the context of extensive transformations as well as the persistent continuities that remained” (8). This starting point is essential to understand the methodology utilized in writing a history of Núu-ci people, as Jones argues that the “origins of Ute people remain controversial” (9). She then privileges scholars who trace Ute history using language and migration patterns. Eventually, she does include a Ute oral account of their origins where Ute worldviews finally emerge. There were no humans in the world; instead, we find out that Siná-wavi, Wolf, created humans from sticks and placed them into a bag facing east. Yukwu-pi-ci, Coyote, untied this bag and all the people ran out and scattered. Eventually, Yukwu-pi-ci would retie the bag, but most of the humans had scattered. Siná-wavi then placed people in different places because they spoke other languages. Despite being outnumbered, the Núu-ci people were able to “defeat the rest. This is how the Ute ended up living in the land where White man discovered them” (11–12).The Ute origin story is fundamental, not just because it places and connects Ute people to their homelands, but because it also highlights their relationships with other Indigenous peoples and explains their differences in language, culture, and ongoing conflict with one another. This story is also significant because it shows that Ute people have relationships with other people and the non-human world. Siná-wavi and Yukwu-pi-ci are pivotal to the creation of humankind. Jones also understands that this origin story affirms Ute claims to land, as “their ancestors had been in their homelands from the beginning and had won the right to remain there. They were rooted in and hence sovereign over their lands” (12). Yet while Jones purports to center Ute worldviews, she immediately dismisses the Núu-ci origin story: “Historians, archaeologists, and anthropologists seek science-based answers” (12). Meaning, Western science and written sources will be privileged first and foremost. Being and Becoming Ute therefore decenters Ute worldviews, thereby undermining a major thesis of the book.Jones uses problematic terminology and fails to connect Ute history to United States settler policies, including US-Indian policies. For example, discussions and debates around Indigenous identity are complex and complicated, and Jones is interested in how Ute people came to define and understand their own identity. In her introduction, Jones frames this through a question, “Who or what [is] a Ute?” and connects it to the larger discussion of Indigenous identity, who gets to claim Indigenous identity, or who is a “real Indian,” and how individuals qualify for tribal citizenship. Jones then explores the complexity of Indigenous identity but falsely attributes this desire to claim Indigeneity with the desire to “gain access to the significant resources reserved for tribes and their members” (3). For example, she asserts that Indigenous people wanted to claim citizenship because they could access “significant resources” (3). This claim perpetuates problematic stereotypes of Indigenous peoples who have access to “free” resources, land, or monetary compensation. Instead, the reader should understand that these “significant resources” are because Utes, like many other tribal nations, ceded large tracts of land and resources to the US and are, therefore, being compensated for the loss of land and traditional ways of living and being. As long as Utes continue to exist as a people, the US must uphold and honor treaties, which is part of the US federal trust responsibility.Another major weakness in the book is the failure to connect Ute history to larger federal Indian policy. Jones does not provide sufficient context for readers regarding policies that would impact the lives of Indigenous peoples. Like other Indigenous peoples, Utes were forced to adapt because of removal and dispossession of land, as when Congress passed legislation like the Dawes Act (1887) to open up additional lands for settlers. The Dawes Act harmed Indigenous nations and peoples because it was interested in “civilizing” Indigenous peoples and allotted land to heads of households, primarily men, to force Indigenous peoples to become private landowners and to farm. However, as Indigenous peoples did not own land, and had maintained a relationship to the land rooted in the philosophy of reciprocity, this was a substantial cultural conflict. The Dawes Act also impacted gender and gendered labor. Before its passage and implementation, many Indigenous women, including Ute women, farmed. With the new law, conversely, Indigenous men became farmers and heads of households. Gendered labor that was once balanced and complementary became disharmonious. In the end, the Dawes Act had a detrimental effect on Indigenous peoples and their identities. According to Jones, these efforts to create a Ute agrarian society failed because it was contrary to Ute language, kinship, and gender roles (152). However, the US government viewed the Dawes Act as a success, since millions of acres of land opened for White settlers because Indigenous peoples could not be civilized.In Being and Becoming Ute, Jones describes Ute homelands as a middle ground on which Mormon settlers established “deep roots” before Indigenous peoples realized how Mormon colonization of this region would affect them (70). Unlike other settlers passing through this region, Mormons had come to settle and claim this land as their own. Like other Mormon scholars, Jones argues that the Mormons approached Indigenous peoples differently than other settlers; this, however, is not entirely accurate. Unlike other White settlers, Mormons viewed Indigenous peoples as “Lamanites,” a fallen people living in a degraded and impoverished state. “Lamanites” could be saved through their conversion to Mormonism. Mormon conversion became part of the assimilation process, much like US assimilationist policies. Yet despite attempts to Mormonize Indigenous peoples, a Mormon empire required the dispossession and removal of Indigenous peoples, mirroring the ideologies of other White settlers. This “middle ground” was not the exchange of culture but the assertion of one worldview over another.Jones uses Mormon religious views on land as a framework to understand the process of Mormon colonization in this region and its impact on Utes. Mormon colonization, in the end, mirrored US colonization of Indigenous lands. Jones begins her narrative with Brigham Young's policies and views of land connected to Mormon theology. Young, the second prophet of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, sought to fulfill Joseph Smith's dream of a Mormon empire free from religious persecution, building on Smith's previous acts to send expeditions to scout possible location. It was no accident that Mormons identified the Great Salt Valley as a Mormon site of colonization: this region had abundant land and natural resources to support and sustain Mormon settlers.Mormons believed their exodus from Illinois and Missouri to the Great Salt Lake Valley was due to divine intervention, as God had set this land aside for Mormons’ exclusive use. Young preached: “I did not devise the great scheme of the Lord's opening the way to send this people to these mountains. Joseph contemplated the move for years before it took place, but he could not get here. . . . I had [nothing] to do with our being moved here, that was the providence of the Almighty” (72). Young goes on to state, “when we first entered Utah, we were prepared to meet all the Indians in these mountains, and kill every soul of them if we had been obliged so to do” (72). Based on these statements, Jones argues that Mormons believed their claims to land trumped Indigenous claims to land because God had set aside this land for Mormon settlers. Indigenous peoples stood as obstacles to Mormons’ civilizing efforts. Young's attitudes and policies towards Indigenous peoples became the foundation for Mormon-Indian policies until the twentieth century. Jones does an effective job of showing how Utes continued to be impacted by these Mormon and US policies.Being and Becoming Ute is a valuable study on how US and Mormon colonization have dramatically impacted a nation and people. Indeed, Mormons replicated US colonial policies when those policies advanced Latter-day Saint purposes, such as claiming Indigenous land. Congress had previously passed the Indian Removal Act in 1830, which eventually forced Chickasaws, Cherokees, Choctaws, Creeks, and Seminoles to move west of the Mississippi to Indian territory. Twenty years later, Mormons pushed for Ute removal. Indian removal, in both instances, was not just about the physical removal; it led to the genocide of entire peoples. Mormons justified Indigenous removal because industrious settlers could make better use of the land. It was easy to stereotype Indigenous peoples as lazy because they did not farm in the same way. These views, therefore, made it easy to justify Indigenous removal.Eventually, much of the land in Great Basin region, including the Salt Lake Valley, would be claimed and settled by Mormons without much federal intervention or any compensation. The theft then caused inevitable conflict between Utes and Mormons. In response, Mormons, like the US government, chose to pursue a policy of extermination. Young stated, “If the Indians sue for peace, grant it to them, according to your discretion and judgment [but] . . . if they continue hostile pursue them until you use them up-Let it be peace with them or extermination” (85, emphasis in original). This war of extermination was costly to both Mormons and Indigenous peoples. Young and his settlers were relentless in their efforts to access and claim land. Jones argues that as both “Western Utes and Mormons struggled to develop the new terms—and a final solution—for their forced coexistence, bloody conflict and cultural change were inevitable” (90). If Utes wanted to persevere, they had to adapt to these changes to ensure their continued existence as a people.Jones's Being and Becoming Ute is a significant contribution to understanding the complexity of Núu-ci and their history. Ute people are still here and their “story . . . is not over yet” (425).