What was the final outcome between the US military and indigenous Americans in the Great Plains?

Article

Think of a Plains Indian tribe and most of us see a nomadic people with horses, hunting the vast herds of bison on the Great Plains. In reality, only some tribes who lived within the area from the Mississippi River in the East to the Great Basin in the West fit this image. There were more than 30 separate tribes, each with its own language, religious beliefs, customs, and way of life. They were as culturally varied as the European immigrants who settled the North American continent.

Some of these tribes were mobile, ranging over a large region in pursuit of bison. Many were also raiders, stealing horses and various goods from other tribes. Other tribes were settled agriculturists, raising crops in fertile river valleys, and also spending some time hunting bison. And the horse itself, what many people consider the defining characteristic of the Plains Indians, was actually a fairly new addition to their lifestyle.

Map of Plains Indian Tribes

NPS

Drawing of "typical" activities in the life of a Plains Indian band.

Public Domain

The Spanish brought horses with them in the 1500s to their settlements in the Southwest, and they eventually spread to Indian tribes in the Great Plains. Most tribes incorporated horses into their economy and culture, while many used the horse to totally transform their lifestyle. The most important change horses brought to these tribes was the ability to abandon permanent villages and travel over the Great Plains to hunt bison. Before the horse, few tribes settled or traveled outside major river valleys because of the enormous distances involved, and the difficulty of hunting bison on foot. Abandoning permanent or semi-permanent villages for a mobile lifestyle meant owning and carrying fewer possessions. Though known as great artists, most of the artwork of a majority of Plains Indian tribes tended to be decorations on things they carried with them and used for daily life, including tipis, clothing, carrying cases, pipes, religious items, and musical instruments.

Reproduction rawhide parchfleche and leather bag used by Plains Indian tribes to carry their possessions when moving from place to place.

NPS

Parfleches (carrying cases) and medicine bundles were usually brightly painted in vivid geometric designs, while clothing tended to have extraordinarily beautiful quillwork. After the introduction of glass and china beads in the 1840s, porcupine quills became less popular, but the resulting work would be considered artistic by anyone’s standards. Paints came from iron—containing ores for brown, red, and yellow, plants, which provided various dyes, and black earth and charcoal for black. The paintings and decorations were more a means of communication than art. And, as with other aspects of their lives, what shapes or colors they used and what they meant differed from tribe to tribe. Although some patterns might be common throughout the region, there were tribal differences, and certain tribes tended to favor certain patterns.

Men usually preferred realistic forms such as battle scenes or great accomplishments, while women worked in geometric designs. Their embroidery work with quills and, later, beads tended to show more variation in the designs than the paintings. However, more elaborate designs did not become commonplace until the availability of cheap and abundant glass and china beads.

The Sioux War - Gen. Crook on the Rosebud River. Many publications of the time presented drawings that romanticized the Plains Indians. This is one such view of the Sioux War.

Public Domain

By 1840, the Plains Indians who adopted the horse reached the height of their development as nomads exploiting bison on the plains. Europeans were moving slowly, but steadily, into their territory. These newcomers did offer some benefits for the tribes. They brought trade items that made life easier, such as metal-tipped arrows, metal tools, pots and pans, guns, and cotton and wool cloth.

In the beginning they were so few in number they didn't seem like much of a threat. And since they brought things that improved the lives of the Indians, they accepted them. The traders did bring whiskey with them, which help contribute to the eventual downfall of the Plains tribes.

After 1840, the trickle of Euro-American settlers and traders moving into the Great Plains became a flood, one that the Indians were unable to hold back. Although they would fight back and even win a few battles, they would eventually be defeated by the sheer numbers arrayed against them.

Eventually, the Plains Indians were forced to submit to the U.S. government policy of removal to reservations where they were encouraged to abandon hunting and gathering for farming and herding. They were also given annuities, including food, tools, clothing, and blankets, in exchange for giving up more and more of their territory.

By 1900 the days of the Plains Indians were over. The tribes were confined to reservations, and their culture and heritage had been taken away by government agents, missionaries, teachers, and merchants. The Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 granted U.S. citizenship to all Indians, and all adult Indians were granted the right to vote in 1948.

Last updated: November 24, 2020

The history of relations between Native Americans and the federal government of the United States has been fraught. To many Native Americans, the history of European settlement has been a history of wary welcoming, followed by opposition, defeat, near-extinction, and, now, a renaissance. To Europeans and Americans, it has included everything from treatment of Native American nations as equals (or near-equals) to assimilation to exile to near-genocide, often simultaneously.

Late 18th Century

Many Native American tribes allied with the British during the Revolutionary War. However, the Treaty of Paris, which ended the war, was silent on the fates of these British allies. The new United States government was thus free to acquire Native American lands by treaty or force. Resistance from the tribes stopped the encroachment of settlers, at least for a while.

Treaty-making

After the Revolutionary War, the United States maintained the British policy of treaty-making with the Native American tribes. In general, the treaties were to define the boundaries of Native American lands and to compensate for the taking of lands. Often, however, the treaties were not ratified by the Senate, and thus were not necessarily deemed enforceable by the U.S. government, leaving issues unresolved.On occasion, the representatives of Native American tribes who signed the treaties were not necessarily authorized under tribal law to do so. For example, William McIntosh, chief of the Muskogee-Creek Nation, was assassinated for signing the Treaty of Indian Springs in violation of Creek law.Treaty-making as a whole ended in 1871, when Congress ceased to recognize the tribes as entities capable of making treaties. The value of the treaties also came to be called into question when the Supreme Court decided, in 1903, Congress had full power over Native American affairs, and could override treaties. Many of the treaties made before then, however, remained in force at least to some extent, and the Supreme Court was occasionally asked to interpret them.

One notable treaty with ongoing repercussions is the Treaty of Fort Laramie of 1868. Under that treaty, the United States pledged, among other things, that the Great Sioux [Lakota] Reservation, including the Black Hills, would be "set apart for the absolute and undisturbed use and occupation" of the Lakota Nation.

Although neither side fully complied with the treaty’s terms, with the discovery of gold in the area, the United States sought to buy back the Black Hills. The Lakota rejected the offer, resulting in the Black Hills War (1876-1877), which included Custer’s Last Stand at the Battle of Little Bighorn (June 25-26, 1876).Finally, in 1877, Congress went back on the original treaty and passed an act reclaiming the Black Hills. In 1923, the Lakota sued. Sixty years later, the Supreme Court determined the annulment was a “taking” under the Fifth Amendment and that the tribe was owed “just compensation” plus interest starting from 1877. The tribe has refused to accept payment, however, and is still seeking return of the land. As of 2018, the amount due appears to be around $1 billion.

Removal and Resettlement

Although conflicts were fought in the Northwest Territories (Tecumseh and the Battle of Tippecanoe) and the Southeast (Creek War and the Seminole Wars), the major policy toward the North American tribes in the early part of the 19th century was removal and resettlement.The Removal Act of 1830 authorized President Andrew Jackson to negotiate for the removal and resettlement of Native American tribes. A primary target was the Cherokee, Creek, Choctaw, Chickasaw, and Seminole from Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Florida. Although the removal and resettlement was supposed to be voluntary, ultimately, this resulted in the series of forcible removals known as the Trail of Tears.

Allotment and Assimilation

For most of the middle part of the 19th century, the U.S. government pursued a policy known as “allotment and assimilation.” Pursuant to treaties that were often forced upon tribes, common reservation land was allotted to individual families. The General Allotment (Dawes) Act of 1887 made this more general, which resulted in the loss of much reservation land.A new approach was undertaken during the New Deal, under President Franklin D. Roosevelt, with the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934, which ended allotment, banned further sale of Native American land, and returned some lands to the tribes.After World War II, however, proposals arose in favor of assimilation, termination of tribes, and an end to reservations. A number of reservations, such as the Menominee in Wisconsin and the Klamath in Oregon, had their reservations terminated.

Today

The influence of the civil rights movement in the 1960s led to the Indian Self-Determination Act of 1975, which restored some sovereignty to tribal governments and gave them a certain independence in handling federal funds and operating federal programs.The status of the Native American tribes with respect to the states is complicated. In general, today’s Native American groups are sovereign within their territory with respect to tribal members, but lack authority over nontribal members.However, the Supreme Court did determine in 1987 that states cannot regulate Native American gaming enterprises. This resulted in the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988, which provided the framework that governs Indian casinos.