Reviewed by: Modernity through Letter Writing: Cherokee and Seneca Political Representations in Response to Removal, 1830–1857 by Claudia B. Haake Rowena McClinton (bio) Modernity through Letter Writing: Cherokee and Seneca Political Representations in Response to Removal, 1830–1857. By Claudia B. Haake. (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2020. Pp. xi, 282. $65.00 cloth; $65.00 paper; $65.00 ebook) Claudia Haake has uncovered numerous letters, petitions, and memoranda written by members of the Cherokee and Seneca nations. Leaders familiarized themselves with the English language for diplomatic means to undergird their political and cultural nationhood. Extensively mining primary sources from the National Archives and the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Haake contends that her work differs from previous interpretations that viewed Indigenous peoples as victims when confronted with forced displacement. Haake reveals that both Cherokee and Seneca nations confronted the vagaries of U.S. policymakers critically and creatively when negotiating their uncertain future. Adopting the English writing system allowed Indians to strategize and plan their own agendas when facing cataclysmic change. Throughout the nineteenth century, Cherokees and Senecas continued their literary expressions while preserving their Indigenous voices. Haake contextualizes writing samples in the time period she addresses. For example, in chapter 1, "Civilization and the Removal Policy," the U.S. Congress passed the 1830 Indian Removal Act to make room for the ever-expanding settler appetite in the South, freeing lands for the escalating slave-based cotton growing plantations. To stem their loss of land, some Cherokees and Senecas had by 1830 accepted Christianity and the English language taught in mission schools. In addressing the public, chiefs from the Cherokees and Senecas, writing fluent English, refrained from employing the "Great Spirit" to debunk any notions of traditionalism. Yet, in these missives, they sustained and incorporated their tribal identity. Literacy was key to reiterate their survival as Cherokees or Senecas. To enhance their status with U.S. officials, Cherokee writers wrote what government [End Page 77] agents wanted to hear. Haake argues that Cherokee missives did not necessarily circulate among all tribal members. In contrast, because of their long-standing tradition of "forest diplomacy" whereby all villagers had a voice in decision making, Seneca letter writers circulated their writings among literate and illiterate peoples. No doubt, western literacy enhanced their political capital. As the nineteenth century progressed, their multiple letters unveiled why land as a tribal unity played havoc with tribal politics. Pressure mounted to vacate their original lands. Every crisis led to more crises. Tribal governments suffered. Through analyzing these missives, Haake details how the Cherokees became factionalized between the Treaty Party advocating abandonment of ancestral lands and the Ross Party promoting preservation of lands in the East. Likewise, the Senecas diverged between those who wanted to retain ancient domains and those who accepted removal. Each faction had members fluent in oral letter writing. Cherokees and Senecas attracted sympathetic audiences to discern their contrasting points of view. Their literacy gave them access to the wider American community that now could understand Indigenous peoples from a non-monolithic lens. Besides her enriching primary sources, Haake's monograph is replete with historiography. In-depth and fastidious research, her text is complementary to literary scholar Maureen Konkle's Writing Indian Nations: Native Intellectuals and the Politics of Historiography, 1827–1863 (2005). Very poignantly, Modernity through Letter Writing unfolds how both tribes envisioned their modernity in the context of literacy leading to political sovereignty. This text is a must read for undergraduate and graduate classes. [End Page 78] Rowena McClinton ROWENA McCLINTON is professor emerita of history, Southern Illinois University, Edwardsville. Copyright © 2021 Kentucky Historical Society
Read full abstract
Dec 31, 2021
Open Access
Beth Marsden + 4