GRSJ224/An Overview of How the Idea of 'The Indian' Was Invented

From UBC Wiki

As the song goes, in August 1492, Columbus sailed the ocean blue. History textbooks recount of a brave explorer named Christopher Columbus who discovered America[1]. While Columbus did not invent America, he did for the most part discover it for Europeans[2]. Textbooks describe Columbus' voyage sailing on three ships, until the admiral and his sailors land and are greeted by "naked, red dish-skinned people" whom he called Indians on account of the erroneous belief that he had reached the Indian Ocean[1]. His mistake of identifying the native inhabitants as Indians would have serious future implications for the group for generations. Beginning with and not limited to erasing the people of their own identity and forcing them to adopt a new one.

Inventing the "Indian"

Johnny Depp's Tonto character's look from The Lone Ranger is inspired by a White man's painting of an imaginary Native American

On August 3, 1492, Columbus began his voyage to discover a Western route to Eastern Asia with the support of Queen Isabella of Castile[3]. However, Columbus believed in the common error of early geographers at the time that the earth was round and compact[4]. Due to Ptolemy mistakenly calculating the globe 6,000 miles short of its actual circumference, this placed Asia in the western hemisphere, leading to Columbus' interpretation that a short route to the east lay due west[4].

Reaching what he believed to be the kingdom of the Great Khan and the riches of India, Columbus was instead met with "strange new people who were not Europeans or Africans, yet neither were they Asians"[5]. In this "New World," Columbus carried with him cultural perceptions that would not only influence his judgement of the land but also its inhabitants[5]. His idea of "Indians" were guided by tales of his seafaring predecessors, by Judeo-Christian mythology and by his own expectations[5]. The term "Indian" was never used by the native inhabitants of Americas to identify themselves prior to colonization. It remains a label brought up by foreigners and imposed by foreigners according to their White values[6]. In fact, by referring to the natives as Indians, European settlers had constructed an idea of a common pan-Indian identity that never existed before[6]. This would work in favour of the Europeans when establishing an "Us versus Them" narrative, lumping all tribes together under the umbrella term "Indian" regardless of their cultural or linguistic differences.

Natives as "Others"

The "New World" found by Columbus was actually an old world that had long been inhabited by a culturally diverse, native civilization[5]. Europeans sough to appropriate Indian lands according to the Doctrine of Discovery, a charter issued by Pope Alexander VI in 1493, which claimed Christian states had sovereign claim to a territory before any other[7]. The doctrine worked as a tool for a Eurocentric worldview that divided all of humanity into Christians and heathens or civilized and savage peoples[7]. Indigenous peoples were positioned as being part of the "savage state" when compared to their colonizers, providing a rationale for European colonization and a working system of oppression. Framing Natives as "Others" allowed for Europeans to impress upon them White self-serving stereotypes to either assimilate or degrade Indigenous peoples[6].

Duelling Characterizations of Natives

The first interactions between Europeans and Indigenous groups provided the framework for stereotypes and negative cultural representations of Native Americans today[8]. Columbus not only mistakenly identified Natives as Indians but also formed the dichotomized image Natives contend with even to this day: as the noble savage or wild beast[8].

Natives as the Wild Beast

After European contact, the prevailing narrative of American history came to begin with Columbus and has never been favourable for American Indigenous peoples [9]. Rather, accounts were made to frame European colonizers as superior and virtuous, while Indigenous peoples were depraved and barbarous[9]. Natives were portrayed in various modes, "as representations of curious exotic people, as allegorical figures in the style of classical divinities, as savage consumers of human flesh"[10]. When Indigenous peoples challenged or expressed hostility toward the Europeans, Columbus would label them as cannibals who must be enslaved[8]. Natives became "Others" and transformed into cannibals or whores while their oppressors became "seekers of justice and benevolent providers"[8].

Natives as the Noble Savage

Native peoples Columbus deemed uncivilized due to their "display of nakedness and easy-going natures" were presumed to be more easily enslaved because of their "friendly, gentle, and naive natures"[8]. As "noble savages," Natives were deemed inferior as opposed to European Christian civilization and thus used for their benefit. Double characterizations of native inhabitants being noble allowed for them to become "fit subjects for inclusion into the empire," while as savages dictatorial rule over them was necessary[6].

Implications

The implications and controversy of using the word "Indian" when speaking of Native Americans constructs an idea that these people exist within a framework of unilinear identity. Essentially stripping them of any cultural, class, economic, political, or social differences they may have. "Indian" becomes an umbrella term that is not only wrong in its origin but also carries with it a negative connotation that has persisted for decades to serve colonial objectives and justify colonization. It's important to view the matter through an intersectional frame of reference, especially when there is so much internal diversity within the group. In our current society, "Native American" is the preferred term over "Indian" in reference to the first peoples of Americas[11]. Some Natives attribute "Indian" as part of Columbus' so-called discovery and therefore part of the legacy which colonized the lands of the Native peoples of the Americas[11]. For those that identify with neither, one may refer to them by their tribe as it is more respectful and accurate. While Native American is preferred over Indian, it is still an umbrella term. Additionally, although Natives may have similarities in culture, tribes may differ in specific aspects. By defining oneself through their tribe, one might reconstruct their own self-identity and resist a label that was assigned through colonial processes of oppression.

Furthermore, it must be taken into account what young students reading textbooks about Columbus exploring a New World by planting a flag and taking possession of land already occupied by "naked red-skinned Indians" learn[1]. These biased historical accounts may condition students to agree with a form of inequality that justifies white people having a right to conquer non-white people on the basis that they're more "civilized" or have a "better" religion[1]. Rarely do historical accounts ever suggest Natives were or should have been autonomous peoples holding rights to control their own lands and liberties. Limited knowledge of the history of Native Americans and their identity contribute to why they are among the most misunderstood ethnic groups in the United States[11]. General impressions of Native peoples may be particularly negative, carried over by a long history of racial stereotyping and prejudice.

References

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 Bigelow, W. (1989). Discovering Columbus: Rereading the Past. Language Arts, 66(6), 635-643.
  2. ↑ Berner, R. (1992). Columbus, Indians, and American Literature. World Literature Today, 66(2), 292-296.
  3. ↑ Greninger, E. (1989). [[ http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/stable/41881851%7CWhat if Columbus Had Landed in Florida?]] International Social Science Review, 64(1), 3-8.
  4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 Howarth, W. (1992). Putting Columbus in His Place. Southwest Review, 77(2/3), 153-165.
  5. ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 Cohen, I. (1992). What Columbus “Saw” in 1492. Scientific American, 267(6), 100-107.
  6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 Berkhofer, R. F. (1978). The white man's Indian: images of the American Indian from Columbus to the present. Toronto: Random House of Canada Ltd.
  7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 Catton, T., & Holtrop, J. (2016). INDIANS, NON-INDIANS, AND THE AMERICAN FORESTS TO 1900. In American Indians and National Forests (pp. 11-34). University of Arizona Press.
  8. ↑ 8.0 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 Robertson, D. L. (2015). Invisibility in the Color-Blind Era: Examining Legitimized Racism against Indigenous Peoples. The American Indian Quarterly, 39(2), 113-153. University of Nebraska Press.
  9. ↑ 9.0 9.1 Miller, S. (2009). Native Historians Write Back: The Indigenous Paradigm in American Indian Historiography. Wicazo Sa Review, 24(1), 25-45
  10. ↑ Trachtenberg, A. (2001). Imaginary Nation: Photographic Constructions of "America". Revue Française D'études Américaines, (89), 10-V.
  11. ↑ 11.0 11.1 11.2 Fleming, W. (2006). Myths and Stereotypes about Native Americans. The Phi Delta Kappan, 88(3), 213-217.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.ubc.ca/index.php?title=GRSJ224/An_Overview_of_How_the_Idea_of_%27The_Indian%27_Was_Invented&oldid=514475"