I uploaded the instruction and required document for the reflection. Please follow the exact guidelines. Thanks
Excerpt from Pratt’s speech: “Kill the Indian, and Save the Man, ” Capt. Richard H. Pratt on the
Education of Native Americans. Source: Official Report of the Nineteenth Annual Conference of
Charities and Correction (1892), 46–59. Reprinted in Richard H. Pratt, “The Advantages of Mingling
Indians with Whites,” Americanizing the American Indians: Writings by the “Friends of the Indian”
1880–1900 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1973), 260–271.
A great general has said that the only good Indian is a dead one, and that high sanction of his
destruction has been an enormous factor in promoting Indian massacres. In a sense, I agree with
the sentiment, but only in this: that all the Indian there is in the race should be dead. Kill the
Indian in him, and save the man….
It is a sad day for the Indians when they fall under the assaults of our troops, as in the Piegan
massacre, the massacre of Old Black Kettle and his Cheyennes at what is termed “the battle of
the Washita,” and hundreds of other like places in the history of our dealings with them; but a
far sadder day is it for them when they fall under the baneful influences of a treaty agreement
with the United States whereby they are to receive large annuities, and to be protected on
reservations, and held apart from all association with the best of our civilization. The destruction
is not so speedy, but it is far more general.
We shall have to go elsewhere, and seek for other means besides land in severalty to release
these people from their tribal relations and to bring them individually into the capacity and
freedom of citizens.
Indian schools are just as well calculated to keep the Indians intact as Indians as Catholic
schools are to keep the Catholics intact. Under our principles we have established the public
school system, where people of all races may become unified in every way, and loyal to the
government; but we do not gather the people of one nation into schools by themselves, and the
people of another nation into schools by themselves, but we invite the youth of all peoples into all
schools. We shall not succeed in Americanizing the Indian unless we take him in in exactly the
same way. I do not care if abundant schools on the plan of Carlisle are established. If the
principle we have always had at Carlisle—of sending them out into families and into the public
schools—were left out, the result would be the same, even though such schools were established,
as Carlisle is, in the centre of an intelligent and industrious population, and though such schools
were, as Carlisle always has been, filled with students from many tribes. Purely Indian schools
say to the Indians: “You are Indians, and must remain Indians. You are not of the nation, and
cannot become of the nation. We do not want you to become of the nation.”
We make our greatest mistake in feeding our civilization to the Indians instead of feeding the
Indians to our civilization.
It is a great mistake to think that the Indian is born an inevitable savage. He is born a blank, like
all the rest of us. Left in the surroundings of savagery, he grows to possess a savage language,
superstition, and life. We, left in the surroundings of civilization, grow to possess a civilized
language, life, and purpose. Transfer the infant white to the savage surroundings, he will grow
to possess a savage language, superstition, and habit. Transfer the savage-born infant to the
surroundings of civilization, and he will grow to possess a civilized language and habit. These
results have been established over and over again beyond all question; and it is also well
established that those advanced in life, even to maturity, of either class, lose already acquired
qualities belonging to the side of their birth, and gradually take on those of the side to which
they have been transferred.
Carlisle fills young Indians with the spirit of loyalty to the stars and stripes, and then moves
them out into our communities to show by their conduct and ability that the Indian is no different
from the white or the colored, that he has the inalienable right to liberty and opportunity that the
white and the negro have.
When we cease to teach the Indian that he is less than a man; when we recognize fully that he is
capable in all respects as we are, and that he only needs the opportunities and privileges which
we possess to enable him to assert his humanity and manhood; when we act consistently towards
him in accordance with that recognition; when we cease to fetter him to conditions which keep
him in bondage, surrounded by retrogressive influences; when we allow him the freedom of
association and the developing influences of social contact—then the Indian will quickly
demonstrate that he can be truly civilized, and he himself will solve the question of what to do
with the Indian.
REFLECTION ONE
Topic: The Frontier and American Expansion
Rationale: American studies scholar Amy Kaplan says, “Nationhood and manhood have long been intimately related in American history through the dynamic of territorial expansion.” Much of this territorial expansion took place on the American Western frontier, and conflict with Native Americans played a large part in forging “the ideology of white masculinity.”
After the Europeans arrived in the Americas, the words “savage” and “Indian” became very closely linked. Early stereotypes of Native Americans as savage and inferior became a persistent theme in the American consciousness and affirmed Euro-American superiority over Native Americans.
Ideologies of white supremacy justified colonization and westward expansion, and informed legal systems that allowed the US to exercise political, social, and economic power over its inhabitants. America’s rise to power through expansion and empire-building was synonymous with the displacement and poor treatment of native inhabitants. Believing themselves superior culturally and racially, white Americans justified their efforts to assimilate and Americanize Native Americans throughout the nineteenth century.
PROMPT: What does it mean to “kill the Indian” and “save the man”? How does that statement reflect US policy towards American Indian populations from 1860-1890, and what parallels can you draw between the treatment of Native Americans at the time and race relations today?
You are required to use the attached document in your argument. You may use outside documents for your argument. Your response will be uploaded through SafeAssign in eCampus to check for plagiarism. Any portion of your response that does not follow the directions and guidelines regarding writing, grammar, mechanics, plagiarism, or fails to answer the question will result in a zero for this assignment.
Your response should be a minimum of 650 words, Times New Roman, 12 point font, 1 inch margins, and no other heading than your first and last name. Remember, all papers are uploaded in DOC format. No other format will be accepted.
You are required to cite all quotes and sources in MLA format. This does not count toward your minimum total length. These citations need to be included in the text and in a works cited sheet (which is a separate sheet at the end of your response). If you do not know how to craft a works cited page, please visit the Brookhaven library. Noodle Tools is available for you to use via the library website.
Please understand that you are required to answer the questions asked. This includes college level writing and editing. There should be no first person anywhere in your response, as you were not there to witness these events.
If you have questions, ASK before the night it is due. I am available to assist you, and the history tutors are available to assist you. Do not wait until it is too late to attempt completion.
Your reflection must meet the minimum criteria in order to be considered for a grade. If you choose to not meet any of the above criteria, you will not earn credit for the assignment. PLEASE CLICK ON THE LINK ABOVE (“REFLECTION ONE”) TO SUBMIT YOUR WORK.
1
Allen
Lynx Allen Comment by Allen, Jennifer: Please be sure to use the proper font and heading as per MLA guidelines.
Also, use the header space to insert page numbers and last name (MLA guidelines)
Dr. Allen
HIST 1302
14 February 2022
Reflection One Comment by Allen, Jennifer: The title is centered.
PROMPT
: What does it mean to “kill the Indian” and “save the man”? How does that statement reflect US policy towards American Indian populations from 1860-1890, and what parallels can you draw between the treatment of Native Americans at the time and race relations today? Comment by Allen, Jennifer: The prompt is restated, according to the directions.
Word Count: 798 Comment by Allen, Jennifer: The word count ONLY includes the actual words of the reflection – the heading, title, and works cited are NOT included!
The American government’s relationship with Native American tribes has been complicated from the beginning of the republic. Once the United States won its independence from Great Britain, the Treaty of Paris (1787) made no mention of relationship parameters with Native Americans and the new nation. Regardless of the past, the new nation could treaty with the tribes or take land by force. Moreover, tribal law was murky insofar as the leader’s ability to sign official agreements with foreign governments. Ultimately, “treaty-making ended as a whole in 1871, when Congress ceased to recognize the tribes as entities capable of making treaties” (National Geographic). Comment by Allen, Jennifer: Please note this paper is left-justified. The paper is NOT centered. Only the title and the “works cited” words are centered. This is important, so follow the rules. Comment by Allen, Jennifer: In text citations for anything quoted. And notice the quotes are integrated with the paragraph. Quotes should NEVER be standalone sentences.
Confusing and oft ignored policymaking between the United States and Native Americans culminated in the late nineteenth century as Anglo citizens pushed westward in search of land and new lifestyles. The post-Civil War era provided the United States with the opportunity to assimilate Native Americans into Anglo culture, and the easiest way to accomplish this task was through Indian boarding schools. As Captain Richard H. Pratt discussed in his speech, the goal was to “kill the Indian in him and save the man” (Pratt). Instead of physically killing anyone of Native American descent, Pratt posited efforts should be undertaken to remove the person’s Indianness and make them more culturally Anglo. As a former Civil War soldier in the Union Army, Pratt founded the Carlisle Indian School in Carlisle, Pennsylvania in 1879, where he ran it until he retired in 1904 (Johnson 120). The concept of the Carlisle Indian School was to “transfer the savage-born infant to the surroundings of civilization,” with the result being that the students will be filled “with the spirit of loyalty to the stars and stripes” (Pratt), because the student will have been indoctrinated into Anglo American culture. The man remained, but any Native American culture has been erased. Comment by Allen, Jennifer: Required use of the primary source. Comment by Allen, Jennifer: Paraphrased but still cited because I had to look this up. Comment by Allen, Jennifer: This answers the first question asked in the prompt.
Pratt’s statements in his speech reflected US policy towards American Indian populations for the latter half of the nineteenth century as “allotment and assimilation” (National Geographic) became the major focus of the government. No other piece of legislation spotlights the American attitude towards Native American populations than the General Allotment Act, better known as the Dawes Severalty Act (1887), allowing the United States Government to dismantle tribal lands. This helped American attempts to assimilate Native Americans into mainstream life (National Archives). The Carlisle schools were to “teach Indian students, some as young as four or five, industrial trades so they could be ‘useful members of American society’ and take that training back to their communities” (Yellowhorse Kesler). At their pinnacle, the Indian Boarding School system numbered 367, with more than seventy-three still in operation today (National Native American Boarding School Healing Coalition). Comment by Allen, Jennifer: This is the second question asked so I placed it here to make sure I answered it and stayed on task. Comment by Allen, Jennifer: Supporting and reliable information from reliable sources Comment by Allen, Jennifer: US policy – I used the Dawes Act because it is obvious and a legal support Comment by Allen, Jennifer: Comment made about Indian schools, and I must cite it because I did not know the exact numbers – or that there were some STILL in existence!
Although the Dawes Act was supposed to protect Native property rights, the opposite transpired. Many of the Native Americans who signed up for property and enrolled with the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) were provided land incapable of sustaining crops and cheated out of their rights from a corrupt government entity. The land size allotted for each person was too small to sustain a family and Native Americans had no resources to invest in tools needed for farming startups, nor did they know how to farm by white standards. In addition, the BIA was completely inept at allocating land or maintaining equity amongst individuals. The Dawes Act, Indian Boarding Schools, and other government policies succeeded in annihilating Indian tribal culture, stealing over 60% of Native American land, and almost destroying the reservation system. Comment by Allen, Jennifer: The previous information provides support for the second question asked in the prompt. STAY ON TASK
Parallels between the treatment of Native Americans by the US government and the treatment of Black Americans can be drawn. The Fair Housing Act (1968) was necessary to pass so that non-Anglo people could purchase houses wherever they chose to do so; until that point, Black American housing options were restricted because of race. Relocating Native Americans to reservations and forcing them to live in specific areas of the country is the equivalent of Black American real estate options prior to 1968. Comment by Allen, Jennifer: Third question in the prompt – modern day parallels. I chose Black Americans. You do not need to discuss every race, ethnicity, religion, etc.…choose one and stick to it. Comment by Allen, Jennifer: Because I know these facts (and let’s hope I do because I teach them – LOL) I do not need to quote anything here. If you do not know something and must look it up, you CITE the source.
Education has also segregated communities. Although not specifically relegated to boarding schools like Native American children, Black students were legally segregated by race until Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954). Although the Brown decision was a watershed in its attempts to equalize the educational opportunities open to all American schoolchildren, forced busing because of Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenberg Board of Education (1971) had to transpire but did not address desegregation across district lines (Milliken v. Bradley) unless public school districts had expressly implemented segregationist policies. De facto segregation, like white flight to the suburbs, continued to reinforce segregated schools. Because of centuries of systemic racism and forced segregation towards both Native American and Black American populations, the results for both groups are eerily similar in that opportunities offered to Anglo-Americans were not available to others. Comment by Allen, Jennifer: I am a legal historian, so my support came from legal cases that I have studied. These are all common US Supreme Court cases any student would learn if they studied the American legal system. Comment by Allen, Jennifer: I have kept my opinions out of the discussion as best as possible because this is history. The prompt did not ask for your opinions.
Works Cited Comment by Allen, Jennifer: The Works Cited page is always a new page, regardless of how many citations you have.
Please do NOT center the entire page – only the title.
Citations are placed in alphabetical order by author. Government agencies are listed by the agency, as no one usually authors the item.
Johnson, N.R. The Chickasaw Rancher. Boulder: University Press of Colorado, 2001.
National Archives. “The Dawes Act (1887),” www.ourdocuments.gov, 6 December 1886. Accessed 14 February 2022.
National Geographic. “The United States Government’s Relationship with Native Americans,” www.nationalgeographic.org, 11 December 2019. Accessed 14 February 2022.
National Native American Boarding School Healing Coalition. “American Indian Boarding Schools by State,” in Healing Voices, Volume 1: A Primer on American Indian and Alaska Native Boarding Schools in the US. 2nd Ed. Minneapolis: The National Native American Boarding School Healing Coalition, 2020.
Pratt, Richard H. “Kill the Indian, and Save the Man.” Official Report of the Nineteenth Annual Conference of Charities and Correction. 1892, pp. 46-59.
Yellowhorse Kesler, Sam. “Indian Boarding Schools’ Traumatic Legacy, and the Fight to Get Native Ancestors Back,” NPR.org, 28 August 2021. Accessed 14 February 2022.