Norwegian Immigrants and "Indianerne" in the Landtaking, 1838-1862

Abstract

10 Norwegian Immigrants and "Indianerne" in the Landtaking, 1838-1862* by Betty A. Bergland 'The Indians have now been transported away from this part of the country far to the west." Ole Rynning, True Account of America, 1838 In the True Account of America, the first and possibly most influential guidebook for potential Norwegian immigrants, Ole Rynning assured his readers that they need not fear Indians. Written in the winter of 1837-1838 at Beaver Creek, Illinois and published in Norway in 1838, the short tract poses thirteen questions and provides their answers. The tenth question combines disease, wild animals , and Indians: "Is there considerable danger from disease in America? Is there reason to fear wild animals and the Indians?" Rynning answers that "Indians have now been transported away" and comments, "these people are very good-natured, and never begin hostilities when they are not affronted." He concludes with more assurance: "They never harm the Quakers, whom they call Father Penn's children Z'1 As a graduate of the university in Oslo, Rynning represented the educated elite and was confident in the truth of his assertions. His book, then, both marks the first guidebook and establishes a structure of knowledge about Indians in *The author wishes to acknowledge a Fulbright Research Grant in Norway and a sabbatical leave from the University of Wisconsin - River Falls during the academic year 1998-1999 that made possible the early research on this long-term project. 319 320 Betty A . Bergland North America. The pattern in his book is repeated in later narratives of North America: 1) the passive construction ("Indians have been transported") identifies no active agent in the removal, implying no need for further investigation; 2) the emptied landscape resulting from the removal eliminates Indian threats, now categorically linked with wild animals and disease; and, thus, 3) immigrants can freely settle territories without fear and in clear conscience. Desirous of providing the practical knowledge that he believed immigrants required, Rynning essentially removed imagined threats from the new world landscape, creating a space ready for migration and cultivation. Thus, when Ingrid Semmingsen writes that most immigrants did not think about Indians, one can trace this pattern back to the first guidebook.2 At the same time, Rynning humanizes the now absent indigenous population by acknowledging them as "good natured" people that "never begin hostilities." Rynning's representations in his guidebook permeate later writings by Norwegian immigrants about Native Americans that incorporate similar contradictions: absence/presence, inhuman/ human, and antipathy/sympathy. Histories of Norwegian migration to the United States, replicating most general histories of the United States, tend to render Native Americans virtually invisible. Nevertheless, because federal policies ceding Indian land made the migration possible, the history of Norwegian immigration and the history of Native American tribes remain intimately connected. Furthermore, because migration from rural communities in Norway in the nineteenth century helped to mitigate overcrowding and poverty and so to preserve cultural patterns in the homeland, Norwegian history also becomes linked to North American tribal histories.3 While such relationships may now appear obvious they remain, significantly , unexplored. The historiography surrounding nineteenthcentury Norwegian immigration and that surrounding tribal fates following federal Indian policies generally continue as separate spheres of inquiry. In effect, relations between indigenous peoples and immigrants remain muted in the historical records and in our conceptualization of the past. This neglect results from multiple developments. First, of course, scholars of immigration sought to document that history Norwegian Immigrants and "Indianerne" in the Landtaking 321 in and of itself. Although reasonable and understandable as an initial approach to the history of a group, this means that relational patterns among Norwegians and other immigrant and ethnic groups tend to be erased. This erasure can also be seen as a part of the fragmentation of historical knowledge. Categorical separation of chronological periods, as well as ethnic and racial groups, fragments knowledge and a deeper understanding of American history . The effect is to isolate groups historiographically. Therefore, as the specialized field of immigration history has focused on single groups, this rich historical literature tends to be neglected by those outside the field. Other broad factors contribute to this erasure and separation, particularly the prevailing...