Teaching about the Indigenous Population of North America

This package includes four lesson ideas with activity sheets that can be adapted for middle or high school.

The first lesson examines factors that influenced the migration and settlement of indigenous peoples across North America and different theories explaining the path of migration. The second lesson examines governance of different indigenous nations and their interaction with neighboring peoples. It also introduces the impact of geography on history and culture. Lesson three discusses the arrival of Norse Vikings and their interaction with the Mi’kmaq. Lesson four engages students in a discussion of “discovery” by European explorers.

LESSON 1: What factors influenced the migration and settlement of indigenous peoples across North America?

This lesson will be the first among three lessons covering the migration of early humans to the Americas, and their subsequent interactions between neighboring tribes and early-Europeans. Students will explore different theories about early human migration, how early humans arrived in the Americas, where they settled, and the impact of geography on their settlement and lifestyle patterns. It was believed that 13,000 years ago, early-humans traveled to the America’s via the Bering Land Bridge, a now-submerged geographical landmark that connected Northeastern Asia with Northwestern Alaska. However, in recent decades, researchers have discovered the remains of early humans in the Americas dating to 16,000 years ago possibly before access via the Bering Land Bridge was available. After collaborative research on migration theories, students will write an argumentative essay illustrating their stance on which theory best explains the evidence. Students will locate difficult vocabulary contained within the research articles and define terms. Enduring issues and unifying themes include the Impact of Environment on Humans; Population Growth; Impact of Technology.

CONTENT VOCABULARY:

Homo sapiens: Modern humans

Bering Land Bridge: Land that connected Asia and Alaska that was submerged when glaciers melted and sea levels rose.

Clovis people: Possible first human s to migrate from Asia to the Americas.

Clovis-First Theory: Belief that no humans lived in the Americas prior to approximately 13,000 years ago.

Artifact: Items made by human beings that provide clues to the past.

Migration: Movement of people across boundaries to new areas.

ACTIVITIES:

Video: “America Unearthed, Proof of Ancient Voyagers to America” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvqANniyRzI ), from the 30:00 time stamp, to the 32:00 time stamp.

The First Native Americans

A. “The Kennewick Man”: On July 28, 1996, two men at Columbia Park in Kennewick, Washington, accidentally found part of a human skull on the bottom of the Columbia River, about ten feet from shore. Later searches revealed a nearly complete, ancient skeleton, now known as “The Ancient One” or “Kennewick Man.” Public interest, debate, and controversy began when independent archaeologist Dr. James Chatters, working on contract with the Benton County coroner, thought that the bones might not be Native American. He sent a piece of bone to a laboratory to be dated. The results indicated an age older than 9,000 years, making The Ancient One among the oldest and most complete skeletons found in North America. Subsequent research on the bones indicated that the skeleton is between 8,400–8,690 years old.

page1image63310896page1image63311104

Questions

1. Who is the Kennewick Man?

2. Why is the discovery of the Kennewick Man significant?

3. In your opinion, how did Kennewick Man arrive in North America?

B. On the timeline of history, the Clovis people appeared out of nowhere and disappeared in the blink of an eye. Archaeologists revealed that the Clovis had a pretty short existence: They first appeared in America around 9,200 B.C. and vanished 500 years later, around 8,700 B.C. So where did the Clovis come from and where did they go? Intense investigation into clues the Clovis left behind was launched as more artifacts were discovered. The Clovis-First Theory proposes that these people arrived in North America, from Siberia, where hunter-gatherer tribes lived.

(Source: Were the Clovis the first Americans? | HowStuffWorks)

Questions

1. According to the text, how long were the Clovis people present in North America?

2.  In your opinion, why did the Clovis people migrate to North America?

C. Native Americans — like all humans—are descendants of the first humans, who lived and evolved over millennia in Africa. Though it is unclear when some of the first humans left the continent, evidence suggests that their migration out of Africa occurred approximately 200,000 years ago, gradually populating parts of the middle east, Europe and Asia. The arrival of humans into North America is believed to have occurred between 45,000 to 25,000 ago, the same time other groups of humans migrated into new territories including Australia and East Asian Pacific islands. We can’t be sure of the exact reasons humans first migrated off of the African continent, but it is likely the reason was a depletion of resources like food in their regions and competition for those resources.

(Source: Homo sapiens & early human migration (article) | Khan Academy.)

page3image63057072page2image63393440


Questions

1. When does the author of this article claim humans began migrating to North America?

2. Why did humans migrate out of Africa and across the globe?  

3. Using the map, how do you think humans migrate to North America?

D. Beginning in the early 1800s, American scientists and naturalists began to speculate about the ways early humans arrived in the Americas. However, it wasn’t until the mid-1920s that scientists determined
that towards the end of the Ice Age, the Earth experienced a long period of frigid [below-freezing] conditions. Glaciers formed in the northern region of the Earth. As more of the Earth’s water got locked up in the glaciers, sea levels dropped. In some areas it dropped up to 300 feet. The land beneath the Bering Strait, a waterway separating Asia and North America was exposed and a flat grassy treeless plain emerged. This exposed land is known as the Bering Land Bridge.


Questions

1. What impact do you think the glaciers had on early human migrations?

2. In your opinion, do you think that the Bering Land Bridge was the only way early humans could travel to the Americas?

E. Student teams will examine two other proposed explanations for human migration into North America.

The Pacific Coast Migration Model is a theory concerning the original colonization of the Americas that proposes that people entering the continents followed the Pacific coastline, hunter-gatherer-fishers traveling in boats or along the shoreline and subsisting primarily on marine resources.

https://www.thoughtco.com/pacific-coast-migration-model-prehistoric-highway-172063

The Solutrean hypothesis suggests that Neolithic fishermen and hunters from Northern Europe sailed the Atlantic in tiny boats made of animal skins 18,000 years ago and colonized the eastern United States.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/1999/nov/28/archaeology.uknews

Exit Ticket: What factors enabled early humans to migrate and settle in regions across North America?

LESSON 2. What types of interactions did Native Americans have with neighboring communities?
Indigenous tribes in America formed complex, successful societies like the Iroquois Confederacy, and created governing structures and agreements such as the Great Law of Peace. Depending on their location, different indigenous tribes had vastly different power structures, houses, foods, and lifestyles. Students will determine central ideas; provide an accurate summary of the purpose and definition of the Great Law of Peace and the Iroquois Confederacy. Enduring issues and unifying themesincludeImpact of Environment on Humans and Power.

CONTENT VOCABULARY:

Sedentary: the practice of living in one place for a long time.

Nomadic: the movement of a person or people from one place in order to settle in another.

Iroquois Confederacy: Confederation of six tribes across upper New York that played a major role in the struggle between the French and British for control over North America.

COMPELLING QUESTIONS:

  • Why do you think is it important to learn about different tribes from all over what is now the United States?
  • Why do you think the Founding Fathers only adopted some aspects of the Great Law of Peace into their writings? Which parts did they leave out? Why do you think they did?
  • How does geography currently affect the way we live? How do you think it could affect us in the future?
  • Map of Indigenous people in the Territorial United States

Questions

  1. Which groups on the map have you heard of before? What do you know about them?
  2. Which groups are closest to where you live?
  3. How could their location influence their way of life? Give examples.
  4. How do you think these groups of people could have interacted with each other?
  • Iroquois Confederacy

a. “The Peacemaker story of Iroquois tradition credits the formation of the confederacy, between 1570 and 1600, to Dekanawidah (the Peacemaker), born a Huron, who is said to have persuaded Hiawatha, an Onondaga living among Mohawks, to advance “peace, civil authority, righteousness, and the great law” as sanctions for confederation. Cemented mainly by their desire to stand together against invasion, the tribes united in a common council composed of clan and village chiefs; each tribe had one vote, and unanimity was required for decisions. Under the Great Law of Peace (Gayanesshagowa), the joint jurisdiction of 50 peace chiefs, known as sachems, or hodiyahnehsonh, embraced all civil affairs at the intertribal level.”

b. “The Iroquois Confederacy established that each nation should handle their own affairs. The Great Law of Peace is a unique representational form of government, with the people in the clans having say in what information is passed upward.” (Source: Britannica)

Questions

  1. What is the Iroquois Confederacy?
  2. What would the benefits of a confederacy be?
  3. What is the primary structure of the Great Law of Peace?
  4. What historical documents remind you of the Great Law of Peace? What documents do you think could have been influenced by the Great Law of Peace?

C. Great Law of Peace

The Great Law of Peace are “teachings [that] emphasized the power of Reason, not force, to assure the three principles of the Great Law: Righteousness, Justice, and Health.” It also includes “instructions on how to treat others, directs them on how to maintain a democratic society, and expresses how Reason must prevail in order to preserve peace.” (Source: Haudenosaunee Guide for Educators)

Selected components:

     16. If the conditions which arise at any future time call for an addition to or change of this law, the case shall be carefully considered and if a new beam [law] seems necessary or beneficial, the proposed change shall be voted upon and if adopted it shall be called, “Added to the Rafter.”

24. The chiefs of the League of Five Nations shall be mentors of the people for all time. The thickness of their skins shall be seven spans, which is to say that they shall be proof against anger, offensive action and criticism. Their hearts shall be full of peace and good will and their minds filled with a yearning for the welfare of the people of the league. With endless patience, they shall carry out their duty. Their firmness shall be tempered with a tenderness for their people.

92. If a nation, part of a nation, or more than one nation within the Five Nations should in any way endeavor [try] to destroy the Great Peace by neglect or violating its laws and resolve to dissolve the Confederacy such a nation or such nations shall be deemed guilty of treason and called enemies of the Confederacy and the Great Peace.

93. Whenever a specially important matter or a great emergency is presented before the Confederate Council and the nature of the matter affects the entire body of Five Nations threatening their utter [complete] ruin, then the Lords of the Confederacy must submit the matter to the decision of their people and the decision of the people shall affect the decision of the Confederate Council. This decision shall be a confirmation of the voice of the people.

94. The men of every clan of the Five Nations shall have a Council Fire ever burning in readiness for a council of the clan. When it seems necessary for a council to be held to discuss the welfare of the clans, then the men may gather the fire. This council shall have the same rights as the council of the women.

95. The women of every clan of the Five Nations shall have a Council Fire ever burning in readiness for a council of the clan. When in their opinion it seems necessary for the interest of the people they shall hold a council and their decision and recommendation shall be introduced before the Council of Lords by the War Chief for its consideration. (Source)

Questions

  1. What do these sections tell you about the values of the Iroquois Confederacy?
  2. How does the Great Law of Peace differentiate from more modern United States’ government documents?
  3. What does the Great Law of Peace have in common with the ideals of more modern government?

D. Group Activity: Each group will be working on a separate area of what is now America. The groups are Plains, Northeast, Southwest, and Eastern Woodlands. The groups will look at/research images and readings and answer the sheets that go along with them. They will then participate in a “jigsaw” and fill out the rest of their charts using information from other groups representatives. On each sheet there will be a section at the top where they will write the definitions of nomadic and sedentary, this will be provided by the teacher (see Appendix A).

Plains Indians Information Sheet

“Many people think of the Plains Indians as people who traveled from place to place to find food and basic supplies. Only some of the tribes in this area lived that way. There were more than 30 different tribes who lived in the Great Plains. Like the Europeans who came to America from different countries, these tribes all had their own language, religious beliefs, customs and ways of life.”

(Source)

“The Plains Indians who did travel constantly to find food hunted large animals such as bison (buffalo), deer and elk. They also gathered wild fruits, vegetables and grains on the prairie. They lived in tipis, and used horses for hunting, fighting and carrying their goods when they moved. Other tribes were farmers, who lived in one place and raised crops. They usually lived in river valleys where the soil was good.”
(Source)

“Most Indigenous societies of the Great Plains practiced some form of hereditary chieftainship and recognized a head chief. In theory, the head chief presided over a council composed of war chiefs, headmen, warriors, and holy men. In practice, however, charismatic, self-made war-party

leaders often exercised the most significant authority, especially in times of crisis.” (Source)

Northeast Indians Information Sheet

The most elaborate and powerful political organization in the Northeast was that of the Iroquois Confederacy. A loose coalition of tribes, it originally comprised the Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga, and Seneca. Later the Tuscarora joined as well. Indigenous traditions hold that the league was formed as a result of the efforts of the leaders Dekanawida and Hiawatha, probably during the 15th or the 16th century.”

(Source)

 “The Northeast culture area comprises a mosaic of temperate forests, meadows, wetlands, and waterways. The traditional diet consisted of a wide variety of cultivated, hunted, and gathered foods, including corn (maize), beans, squash, deer, fish, waterbirds, leaves, seeds, tubers, berries, roots, nuts, and maple syrup.”  (Source)

“Northeastern cultures used two approaches to social organization. One was based on linguistic and cultural affiliation and comprised tribes made up of bands (for predominantly mobile groups) or villages (for more sedentary peoples). The other was based on kinship and included nuclear families, clans, and groups of clans called moieties or phratries.” (Source)

Southwest Indians Information Sheet

“Most peoples of the Southwest engaged in both farming and hunting and gathering; the degree to which a given culture relied upon domesticated or wild foods was primarily a matter of the group’s proximity to water. A number of domesticated resources were more or less ubiquitous throughout the culture area, including corn (maize), beans, squash, cotton, turkeys, and dogs. During the period of Spanish colonization, horses, burros, and sheep were added to the agricultural repertoire, as were new varieties of beans, plus wheat, melons, apricots, [and] peaches.” (Source)

“For those groups that raised crops, the male line was somewhat privileged as fields were commonly passed from father to son. Most couples chose to reside near the husband’s family (patrilocality), and clan membership was patrilineal. In general women were responsible for most domestic tasks, such as food preparation and child-rearing, while male tasks included the clearing of fields and hunting.” (Source)

“Among the Navajo the preferred house form was the hogan, a circular lodge made of logs or stone and covered with a roof of earth; some hogans also had earth-berm walls. Among the Apache, the wickiup and tepee were used.” (Source)

Upland settlements “included dome-shaped houses with walls and roofs of wattle-and-daub or thatch. The groups that relied on ephemeral streams divided their time between summer settlements near their crops and dry-season camps at higher elevations where fresh water and game were more readily available. Summer residences were usually dome-shaped and built of thatch, while lean-tos and windbreaks served as shelter during the rest of the year.” (Source)

Southern Woodlands “Indians” Information Sheet

“The importance of corn in the Southeast cannot be overemphasized. It provided a high yield of nutritious food with a minimal expenditure of labour; further, corn, beans, and squash were easily dried and stored for later consumption. This reliable food base freed people for lengthy hunting, trading, and war expeditions. It also enabled a complex civil-religious hierarchy in which political, priestly, and sometimes hereditary offices and privileges coincided.” (Source)

“Most of the region teemed with wild game: deer, black bears, a forest-dwelling subspecies of bison, elks, beavers, squirrels, rabbits, otters, and raccoons. In Florida, turtles and alligators played an important part in subsistence. Wild turkeys were the principal fowl taken, but partridges, quail, and seasonal flights of pigeons, ducks, and geese also contributed to the diet. The feathers of eagles, hawks, swans, and cranes were highly valued for ornamentation, and in some tribes a special status was reserved for an eagle hunter.” (Source)

“In general, settlements were semi-permanent and located near rich alluvial soil or, in the lower Mississippi region, near natural levees. Such land was easily tilled, possessed adequate drainage, and enjoyed renewable productivity.” (Source)

“In much of the region, people built circular, conical-roofed winter “hot houses” that were sealed tight except for an entryway and smoke hole. Summer dwellings tended to be rectangular, gabled, thatch-roofed structures made from a framework of upright poles.” (Source)

LESSON 3. How did Native Americans, like the Mi’kmaq, interact with foreign societies, like the Norse?

The Norse arrived North America, but their settlements disappeared. Evidence suggests that Norse Viking, Leif Eriksson, traveled to North America in 1000 A.D, roughly 500 years before other European explorers.  Students investigate how, why, and where the Norse settled in North America. Students interpret the interactions between the Norse and the Mi’kmaq. It is believed that the Norse voyage to the new continent was the result of climatic fluctuations that forced settlers to seek new lands in an effort to survive and prosper. Upon their arrival to Newfoundland, evidence from the Greenlander Saga suggests that Norse Vikings encountered the Native American tribe, The Mi’kmaq, periodically engaging in limited trade with them, before the two groups engaged in conflict leading some researchers to speculate this was a cause of their disappearance. Students will examine how the physical environment and natural resources of North America influenced the development of the first human settlements and the culture of Native Americans as well as impacted on early European settlements. Students will research and write a 250-word argumentative short-essay, in which they introduce factors they believe influenced the disappearance of the Norse Vikings. Enduring issues and unifying themes include Impact of the Environment, Trade, Technology, and Conflict on human societies.

CONTENT VOCABULARY:

  • Norse– Settlers, traders, farmers, and seafarers who originated in Scandinavia.
  • Viking – Norse warriors and seafarers.
  • Vinland– An area of coastal North America explored by Vikings.
  • L’Anse aux Meadows – Remains of an 11th-century Viking settlement in Newfoundland
  • Mi’kmaq- Indigenous people of the Northeastern Woodlands, native to the areas of Canada’s Atlantic Provinces.
  • The Viking Compass

Vikings did not have much material to work with other than wood and animal hair, to make it across the oceans, but they apparently didn’t require much more than that to get to where they were going and make it back again. In 1948 a (partial) wooden artifact was found in Greenland (called the Uunartoq disk), which was assumed to be some form of compass. Only representing a portion of a wheel or ‘disk,’ the partial device had notches carved around the perimeter and scratch marks at a few distinct intervals across the face. (Source)

  • Questions:
  • According to the text, what was needed, in order to use the “Viking Compass”?
  • Why is a compass important when traveling long distances across the ocean?
  • How might the discovery of this artifact change how we understand European Exploration of the Americas?
  • Evidence that the Norse reached North America

According to the “Saga of the Greenlanders”, Vikings became the first European to sight mainland North America when a Viking merchant, headed for Greenland, was blown westward off course about 985. Further, about 1000, Leif Eriksson, a notorious viking leader, is reported to have led an expedition in search of the land sighted by the viking merchant, and found an icy barren land he called Helluland (“Land of Flat Rocks”) before eventually traveling south and finding Vinland (“Land of Wine”).The narratives of exploration of a place that sounded like Maine, Rhode Island, or Atlantic Canada were thought to be just stories, until 1960, when Helge Ingstad, a Norwegian explorer, and archaeologist Anne Stine Ingstad, were led by a local man to a site on the northern tip of Newfoundland island. At L’Anse aux Meadows, they discovered the remains of a Viking encampment that they were able to date to the year 1000 — That’s almost 500 years before the Europeans landed in the Americas! (Source)  

Questions

  1. Who led the Viking expedition to North America?
  2. How long before Columbus, did the Vikings arrive in North America?
  3. Do you think that it is fair to say that the Vikings discovered North America? Explain.

C. The Norse meet the Mi’kmaq

The Mi’kmaq are among the original inhabitants of the Atlantic region in Canada, and inhabited the coastal areas of Gaspé and the Maritime Provinces east of the Saint John River. This traditional territory is known as Mi’gma’gi (Mi’kma’ki) and is made up of seven districts. Mi’kmaq people have occupied their traditional territory, Mi’gma’gi, centuries before the arrival of the Vikings. Today, the remaining members of the Mi’kmaq community continue to occupy this area, as well as settlements in Newfoundland and New England, especially Boston. While it is not entirely clear, as to how the Mi’kmaq and the Vikings interacted, historical accounts of their interactions have suggested that the Mi’kmaq not only engaged in trade with the Vikings, but they also found themselves engaged in conflict with one another as well.

Going further, researchers have since discovered that the Mi’kmaq had developed oral histories that speak of a Mi’kmaq woman’s ancient premonition [dream] that people would arrive in Mi’gma’gi on floating islands, and a legendary spirit who traveled across the ocean to find “blue-eyed people.” Since the story’s discovery, many individuals have regarded its existence as a foretelling of the arrival of Europeans.

Questions:

  1. What areas of the present-day United States and Canada did the Mi’kmaq people inhabit?
  2. How might the “ancient premonition” [ancient dream] of “blue-eyed people” arriving in North America help us understand how Native Americans viewed and interacted with European explorers?

D. Unknown American Holiday: Leif Erikson Day
Leif Erikson was likely born in Iceland around 970 or 980 AD, and was the son of infamous Norse chieftain, Erik the Red. Leif, much like his father, was a true Viking from the start, and began sailing with his crew across present-day western Europe and parts of Scandinavia. Nevertheless, the story begins with Leif traveling to present-day Greenland. It was on this journey in approximately 999 AD, that Leif Erikson and his crew would be blown off-course, to a location they named “Vinland,” meaning “Land of
Wine.” While at first it would appear that Erikson found something other than North America, the descriptions of the surrounding area and its inhabitants have led researchers to believe that Erikson is writing about his arrival in North America. In 2024, President Joseph Biden declared October 9th Leif Erikson Day. (Source)

Questions:

  1. When did Leif Erikson arrive in North America?
  2. In your opinion, why does Leif Erikson Day have less recognition than Columbus Day?

E. Group Activity—Investigate the Disappearance the Newfoundland Norse Settlement

Instructions: In groups of three or four, students will be tasked with investigating the possible reasons for the Norse Vikings’ mysterious disappearance from their North American settlement.

Station #1: Climate Change

There was a time centuries ago that settlements in cold northern lands grew little by little with the arrival of new inhabitants. Up to the 15th Century, the territories we now know as Greenland and Newfoundland in North America, reached population sizes of around 2,000. From then on, these lands began to depopulate. Early research said the exodus was due to many problems, but temperature change has often been cited as an explanation for the end of the Vikings. According to this theory, the Nordics arrived in the North during a period that was more or less warm, where they could survive until temperatures fell during a period known as, the Little Ice Age.    A ship on cracked ground with a tree and a yellow sun

Description automatically generated

     Now, new research by the College of Natural Sciences at the University of Massachusetts Amherst concludes that summers were increasingly warm and dry in Greenland and Newfoundland during the time the Nordic settlements were abandoned. Thus, the trigger for the disappearance of the Vikings could have been drought. Source:Climate history: Why did the Vikings disappear from northern lands?]. 

Questions

1. What other regions did the Vikings visit?

2. How did climate impact the survival of the Vikings in North America?

3. What climate event occurred that made it more difficult for Vikings to live in North America?

Station #2: Conflict with the Native Americans

[Source:When Vikings Clashed with Native North Americans  ]. 

The settlement at L”Anse aux Meadows was only in use for roughly twenty years or so. It’s estimated that the Vinland settlements lasted the same amount of time.While scholars do not know why the Vikings abandoned the settlements so quickly, there are several theories. Hostile relations with the natives surely did not help matters. Though their iron tools aided them in battle, the natives dramatically outnumbered the Vikings who only numbered at most in the low hundreds. In an early encounter, one of the viking chieftains that lead the group of norse settlers in Newfoundland, Leif Eiriksson, is recorded to have been “struck by an arrow”. It would later be determined through these records —The Vinland Sagas—that his injuries would prove fatal. While it is not clear what tribes attacked the Vikings during their stay, evidence suggests that it was likely a number of Inuit tribes, including the Mi’kmaq. That being said, due to the increased amount of conflict between the Vikings and Native tribes, the Vikings dubbed their enemies Skraelings, which historians believe translates as either “barbarian” or “foreigner” in the old Norse tongue. It could have also meant “weak” or “sickly” or even “false friend”.

Questions

  1. According to the document, how long were the Vikings in North America?
  2. How did conflict with the Native Americans impact the Vikings living in North America?
  • Why do you think the Vikings were attacked by Native Americans?

Station #3: Economics

[Source: Why didn’t the Vikings colonize North America? | Live Science : ]. 

When the Vikings explored south of Newfoundland, in an area they named “Vínland” (which translates as “Wine Land”), they were more interested in finding natural resources they could exploit. However, Kevin P. Smith, a research associate at the Smithsonian Institute who specializes in the Vikings, had a somewhat different opinion. He said that Norse texts indicate that some Vikings believed it offered “opportunities for ‘second sons’ of the chieftain who had established the Greenland colony to carve out their own areas where they could be leaders/chiefs rather than second sons.

Be that as it may, there is a leading theory that presumes the Vikings had abandoned the settlement largely due to its decline in economic importance. For instance, Medieval Europe had coveted [desired] walrus ivory leading to the market’s expansion across the North Atlantic. As such, and by the time the Vikings had sailed to and settled in North America, a series of large walrus colonies had already been established in Northern Greenland, which researchers speculate, ultimately diminished the economic significance of the North American settlement. Going further, many researchers have also speculated that the abandonment of the settlement was also influenced by the nature of walrus tusk hunting; It was dangerous, time consuming, and expensive.

Questions

  1. Using the text, define the term “Vinland.”
  2. Why was the settlement in North America important for the Vikings?
  • What economic factors influenced the Vikings to abandon their settlement in North America? Explain.

Station #4: Distance

[Source: The Norse in the North Atlantic  ].

Another important question is why the Norse failed to settle permanently in North America. How was it that they could survive in Greenland for 500 years, but could not establish themselves in Vinland, with its richer resources and better climate? Vinland was a remote place, and voyaging there was risky and uncertain, as we know from the sagas. In the early 11th century, the Greenland settlements were still young and did not have the population nor the wealth to support a new colony in North America. Additionally, there was also little incentive, in that the economy which developed in Greenland did not need expansion to America. There might have been some incentive later in the history of the Greenland settlements, but by that time — the13th and 14th centuries — the inhabitants were preoccupied with their own survival and would not have had the resources or the interest to create a new colony. Greenland was a fragile colony, incapable of sustaining itself as climatic, economic, and political conditions deteriorated. According to Thomas McGovern, a leading authority on Norse expansion to North America, “Greenland simply did not produce enough people or riches to act as a successful base for sustained colonization attempts, and Norse Greenlanders may have seen little immediate benefit in expanding in Vinland.”

Questions

  1. How did the Norse colony at Greenland impact the settlement in North America?
  2. Why did the Norse colony in Greenland begin to collapse?
  • What happened during the 13th and 14th centuries that prevented Vikings from settling in North America?

LESSON 4. How did interactions among Native Americans and outsiders challenge our understanding of early exploration and the “discovery” of America?  It is still debated how and when early humans arrived in North America. Eventually a number of Native American tribes existed across the modern-day United States and the Americas. The laws and alliances, like the Iroquois Confederacy and the Great Law of Peace, made by Native Americans between themselves and outsiders may have contributed to the founding documents of the United States. This lesson is a Socratic Seminar. Students will have collaborative discussions, work civilly and democratically to evaluate diverse perspectives about how early humans migrated to the Americas, the significance of the Great Law of Peace on American law, and the dangers of leaving groups of people out when learning about history. Enduring Issues will be discussed in this lesson include Power and the Impact of Immigration.

VOCABULARY REVIEW MATCHING ACTIVITY

The Bering Land Bridge Clovis First Theory
Solutrean Hypothesis
Trans-Pacific Migration Theory The Great Law of Peace
Artifact
Migration
Clovis People
Nomadic
Sedentary
Confederacy
Iroquois Confederacy
Saga of the Greenlanders
Mi’kmaq
Plains tribes
Northeastern tribes
Southwestern tribes
Southern Woodlands tribes
A. An ancient culture of North America that lived between 10,000 and 9,000 BCE B. The first humans to reach the Americas migrated from Asia by traveling across the Pacific Ocean C. Nomadic people who resided largely in the western plains D. Source on Norse colonization of North America E. Group of people joined together for a common purpose
F. The practice of living in one place for a long time
G. People who move from one place in order to settle in another
H. Indigenous people of what is now Canada and Nova Scotia
I. Art, tools, and clothing made by people of any time and place
J. Sedentary people of Alaska and Northwestern California K. Sedentary people who resided largely near the Atlantic Ocean
L. Oral constitution of the Iroquois Confederacy
M. Communities who move from one place to another
N. Confederation governed by the Great Law of Peace O. Land bridge connecting Asia to North America
P. Hunters considered the first people to arrive in the Americas
Q. Belief that early Europeans arrived in the Americas R. People who resided in present day New Mexico and Arizona

COMPELLING QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION:

  1. Who should be called the “first Americans?” Should anyone?
  2. What could be the consequences of designating one group of people as the “first” be?
  3. Why would it be important to recognize all of the different groups you learned about? What could happen if we do not mention them?
  4. What is the danger of forgetting or leaving out groups of people from history? Is there any?
  5. Which theory of migration do you think is most plausible?
  6. Why do people migrate? Have the motives for migration changed from then to now? How so?
  7. How do we make welcoming communities for those who migrate?
  8. How has your understanding of Indigenous American history and the “discovery” of America changed?
  9. How did interactions among Native Americans and outsiders challenge our understanding of early exploration and the “discovery” of America?

Appendix A: Sample Worksheet

 Nomadic or SedentaryHousingLeadership StructureLocation (Modern Country and State)TribesFood Sources
Plains      
Northwest      
Southwest      
Eastern Woodlands      

Bartolomé de Las Casas: Defender of the Indians

Dan La Botz

Reprinted with permission from NewPolitics.

Figure 1: Theodore de Bry’s illustrations to Las Casas’ Brief Account of the Conquest of the Indies.

Bartolomé de las Casas was born in 1484 in Seville, to a French immigrant merchant family that had helped to found the city. One biographer believes his family were conversos, that is, Jews who had converted to Catholicism. As a child, in 1493 he happened to witness Christopher Columbus’ return from his first voyage to the Americas to Seville with seven Indians and parrots that were put on display. Queen Isabella ordered the Indians to be returned to their native land.

Bartolomé’s father, Pedro de las Casas, joined Columbus on his second voyage and brought home to Seville as a present for his son Bartolomé an Indian. In 1502 Pedro took Bartolomé with him on the expedition of Nicolás de Ovando to conquer and colonize Española (in English the island of Hispaniola, today made up of the Dominican Republic and Haiti). Bartolomé conducted slave raids on the Taino people (who were virtually annihilated by the Spaniards) and was rewarded with land and became the owner of a hacienda as well as slaves. In 1506 he returned to the University of Salamanca, where he had previously studied, and then traveled to Rome where he was ordained, becoming a priest in 1507.

When in 1510 Dominican friars led by Pedro de Córdoba arrived in Santo Domingo, they were horrified at the Spaniards’ treatment of the Indians, the massacres, the brutality of slavery, and the intense exploitation of the natives and they denounced it. Las Casas rejected the Dominicans’ criticism and defended the encomienda system by which Spaniards distributed laborers to the conquerors.

In 1513, Las Casas joined the expeditions of Diego Velázquez de Cuéllar and Pánfilo de Narváez to conquer Cuba, acting as chaplain. He witnessed horrifying murders and torturers of the indigenous people. Once again, he received a reward, this time of gold and slaves. For a year he lived as both colonist and priest. Then in 1514, while studying the Book of Ecclesiasticus, he came across a passage that called his beliefs into question. It read:

Reading this passage — and no doubt meditating on the horrors that he had both participated in and witnessed — Las Casas suddenly decided to break with his past. He gave up his haciendas, his encomienda, his slaves. He began to encourage others Spaniards to do the same, but of course they refused and they resented him.,Las Casas then traveled to Spain to take his case to King Ferdinand, and he succeeded in having one meeting with him, but then the monarch died in 1516. Many of the other higher-ups in the Spanish state and Church, such the Bishop of Burgos, Juan Rodríguez de Fonseca, who controlled the Crown’s business in the Americas, were themselves encomenderos who profited from the labor of the indigenous and they rejected Las Casas’ appeals to protect the Indians. Fearing that the entire population of the Indies, the Caribbean islands, might be annihilated, Las Casas wrote his Memorial de Remedios para las Indias (Memorandum on Remedies for the Indies) to be presented to the regents who now rules, calling for a moratorium on all Indian labor to protect the indigenous people and allow the recuperation of their populations.

Convinced by Las Casas’ argument that the Indians needed to be protected, one of the regents, Cardinal Ximenes Cisneros, put the Carmelite monks in charge of the Indies. Las Cases himself was given the official title and position of “Protector of the Indians. Under pressure from Las Casas, in 1542 King Charles V promulgated the New Laws to protect the Indians from exploitation. 

King Carlos V, concerned about conditions in the Spanish American colonies decided to organize a debate between the two principal intellectuals on opposite sides of the question. Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda, claimed that the indigenous people of the Americas were barbarians: ignorant, unlettered, and unreasoning, incapable of learning anything except the simplest tasks. The Spaniards, he argued, being superior in intelligence and morality, had the right to make war on them and conquer them. The Indians were, he said, incapable of governing themselves. He argued that they were sunk in depravity, worshiping idols and engaging in human sacrifice. He quoted the Bible and other authorities to argue that in ancient times such people had been justly exterminated or enslaved. Natural law, he averred, dictated that the Spaniards, superior in intelligence and morality, should govern them.

In response, Las Casas either refuted Sepúlveda’s arguments, such as the claim that the indigenous Americans were ignorant and incapable of governing themselves, by providing evidence of their intelligence and self-government, or he argued, as in the case of idolatry and human sacrifice, that these practices had to be seen as demonstrating their religious inclination, their attempts to worship God. Las Casas denied the Spaniards’ right to ever invade, occupy, conquer, and subject the indigenous. He argued that the Spaniards’ wars against the Indians were unjust and therefore enslavement of the Indians was illegal and wrong, since only the captives of a just war could be enslaved.

De Las Casas and Sepúlveda Debate Treatment of the Indigenous Peoples of the Americas

Theologian Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda

Fray Bartolomé de Las Casas

“Among our Indians of the western and southern shores (granting that we call them barbarians and that they are barbarians) there are important kingdoms, large numbers of people who live settled lives in a society, great cities, kings, judges, laws, persons who engage in commerce, buying, selling, lending, and the other contracts of the law of nations . . . Reverend Doctor Sepúlveda has spoken wrongly and viciously against peoples like these, either out of malice or ignorance . . . and therefore, has falsely and perhaps irreparably slandered them before the entire world? From the fact that the Indians are barbarians it does not necessarily follow that they are incapable of government and have to be ruled by others, except to be taught about the Catholic faith and to be admitted to the sacraments. They are not ignorant, inhuman, or bestial. Rather, long before they heard the word Spaniard they had properly organized states, wisely ordered by excellent laws, religion and custom . . . Since, therefore, every nation by the eternal law has a ruler or prince, it is wrong for one nation to attack another under pretext of being superior in wisdom or to overthrow other kingdoms. For it acts contrary to the eternal law, as we read in Proverbs . . .  ‘This is not an act of wisdom, but of great injustice and a lying excuse for plundering others.”
  1. What term does Sepúlveda use to describe the indigenous people of the Americas?
  2. According to Sepúlveda, when are slavery and “booty” justified?
  3. What does Sepúlveda recommend for governance in the Americas?
  4. What evidence does De Las Casas offer to refute claims made by Sepúlveda?
  5. If you were in the audience during this debate, what questions would you ask them?
  6. Whose position do you agree with more? Why?

Should Chief Daniel Nimham Be Honored or Erased?

Should Chief Daniel Nimham Be Honored or Erased?

Peter Feinman

This article is reprinted with permission from the Institute of History, Archaeology, and Education.

“Chief Daniel Nimham was the last grand Sachem of the Wappinger Confederacy. While Nimham and other Wappingers fought against the French in the French and Indian War, their lands [in what became] Putnam County [NY] were usurped by Adolph Philipse. In 1766, Nimham traveled to England to challenge these fraudulent land titles in the British courts. In 1774, the Stockbridge Indians—a community of Wappinger, Munsee and Mohicans living in Massachusetts—organized a militia or community defense an in solidarity with the American cause of independence. Capt. Daniel Nimham and his son Capt. Abraham [they were Christians], along with the rest of the Stockbridge Militia, served in every major campaign in the eastern theater of the Revolution. By the summer f 1778, the Stockbridge Militia was stationed at an outpost near Fort Independence in the Bronx. This area—between British-occupied Manhattan and the main American forces in White Plains—was a no man’s land and the scene of constant skirmishes and ambushes from both sides. On August 31, 1778, Chief Nimham and the Stockbridge Militia were surrounded and killed by British Dragoons and Hessians under the command of Lt. Col. John Graves Simcoe [best known as an evil villain in the AMC series “Turn” and as a hero and founder in Toronto].” Source: DAR/SAR Brochure

Daniel Nimham has been honored. A cairn of boulders and plaque at Indian Field in Van Cortlandt Park in the Bronx near the site of Nimham’s death, honors him and his fellow warriors. In 1906, the Westchester Historical Society and the Mount Vernon Chapter of the Daughters of the American Revolution created this historical honor. On August 31, 2021, there was a ceremony at the Nimham Monument (which I attended). The event was organized by the Col. Benjamin Tallmadge Bronx Chapter of the Daughters of the American Revolution, the Albuquerque Chapter of the Sons of the American Revolution, and the Knightsbridge Historical Society. In the dedication of Seven Wappinger Stones, the following nations within the Confederacy were honored: Wappingers (Wappingers Falls, Dutchess County); Nochpeem (Carmel, Nimham Mountain, Putnam County); Siwanoy (Bronx, Hunters Island); Weckqueskee (Dobbs Ferry, Westchester County); Sink Sink (Ossining, Westchester County); and Rechewani (Manhattan).

As you can see from the list, there is a mountain in Putnam County named after Nimham. It is near where the Nimham Mountain Singers hold an annual pow-wow in August for the public. The headquarters for the organization is located on Chief Nimham Drive in Carmel, NY. By coincidence, I had alerted a colleague in Fishkill about the event in the Bronx. He arranged to have the municipality present at the event and to participate. They did so because Nimham had either had been born there or lived there. The municipality is arranging to dedicate an eight-foot tall bronze statue in his likeness probably in the spring, 2022. The statue will be located in the hamlet of Wiccopee, in East Fishkill, named after a Wappinger sub-tribe. So there are multiple ways in which Chief Daniel Nimham has been honored. But would you name a school after him and have him as your school mascot?

At the same time Nimham has been honored and in the same area of the Wappinger Confederacy, there also has been an ongoing effort to erase the Indian presence from school mascots. True the examples of the dispute are not for Nimham himself or either for the Wappingers. It is not my intention here to chronicle chapter-and-verse the various community fights over the maintenance or removal of Indian mascots particularly as they relate to high school football teams and other sports. These include the

Cross River John Jay High School Indians, the Mahopac Indians, the Nyack Indians, and the Wappinger Roy C. Ketcham Indians. According to a student petition in Wappinger: “The Roy C Ketcham High School and Wappingers Junior High School both have the mascot the Wappinger Indians. A human being should not be a mascot. This is offensive and damaging to students and community members who are Indigenous people.”

This is an example of teenage idealism at its purest. However, an adult version of these sentiments has been proposed as well in the state legislature that would ban New York schools from using Indian names, logos, and mascots beginning in 2024. Dr. Ian Record of the National Congress of American Indians said in July 2021: “The use of Native American sports mascots, logos or symbols perpetuates stereotypes of American Indians that are harmful. The ‘warrior savage’ myth has plagued this country’s relationship with the Indian people as it reinforces the racist view that Indians are uncivilized and uneducated.”

Heather Bruegel, a historian and cultural affairs director of the Stockbridge-Munsee community now based in Wisconsin said the people were not honored by names such as “Chiefs,” “Warriors,” and “Braves” which are offensive. She would prefer that the history would be taught accurately in the schools.

The Stockbridge Indians are aware of the honoring of Chief Nimham for his actions as a presumably brave warrior. To the best of my knowledge they have launched no campaign to topple the monument and markers to Nimham and his fellow warriors in the Bronx and Putnam nor to the statue to him being planned for the spring.

It seems that words like “warrior,” chiefs,” and “braves” only apply to Indians and to no other peoples. Apparently Achilles was not a warrior. It remains to be seen what would happen if a school or sports team kept the warrior name and changed the mascot. Klingons anyone? One suggestion made in the discussion was that Nyack Indians become the Nyack Lenape after the people who lived there.  That suggestion failed. The dominant decision is the best Indian is an erased Indian.

Consider for example, the Tappan Zee Bridge. It famously combines the Dutch and Tappan Indian heritages in its name – the name of a people and the Dutch word for “sea” at this wide point in the Hudson River. However the mascot of the Tappan Zee High School recognizes the Dutch heritage but ignores the Tappan. They have been erased. The Village of Ossining, named after one of the people part of the Wappinger Confederacy, is debating removing the Indian profile from its seal. It already changed the nick name of the high school from Indians. While the erasure of the Indian heritage is not complete in the village, one can anticipate that it will occur. Most likely the same fate awaits the Lenape, the Stockbridge Indians, and the Wappinger Confederacy wherever the name changes have occurred. The purification process leaves no trace behind. Perhaps Sing Sing, Wappingers, Wiccopee, Tappan, and Katonah will have to change their names as well when the next generation of idealistic teenagers finds a cause.

The Chicago Blackhawks are a hockey team named after an individual named “Black Hawk.” According to a team statement: “The Chicago Blackhawks’ name and logo symbolizes an important and historic person, Black Hawk of Illinois’ Sac & Fox Nation, whose leadership and life has inspired generations of Native Americans, veterans and the public. We celebrate Black Hawk’s legacy by offering ongoing reverent examples of Native American culture, traditions and contributions, providing a platform for genuine dialogue with local and national Native American groups. As the team’s popularity grew over the past decade, so did that platform and our work with these important organizations.” Needless-to-say the team is under pressure to change the name and mascot.

The Spokane Indians, a minor league baseball team, has a similar experience to the Chicago Black Hawks except it is named after a people and not an individual. At one time, the Indian mascot had nothing to do with the actual Spokane Indians located approximately 40 miles away. Now there are regular meetings between the tribe and the team. The mascot has been changed to a trout for a traditional food source of the people. The name on the team uniform is in Salish the language of the Spo-ka-NEE. Exhibits of the culture and history of the people have been placed in the stadium. An advertisement on the scoreboard depicts a traditional Spokane tribe person in headdress. And the nickname of the high school on the Spokane reservation is “Redskins” which does not seem to bother the people there. Obviously both the team and the people are in major need of cleansing and purification to meet Woke standards. A reporter spoke to the chairwoman of the Spokane Tribal Business Council, Carol Evans: “she expressed great pride in the partnership and emphasized the fundamental difference between the Spokane Indians baseball club and other teams. “We are not their mascot,” she said. “They’re named after our tribe.”

The Florida State University provides another example of a win-win solution. From its website:

“In the late 1960s and early 1970s, FSU’s campus became a learning ground with regard to the Florida Seminole Indians. Several key people were directly responsible for the new awareness. Joyotpaul “Joy” Chaudhuri, an American Indian expert and FSU professor of political science, and his wife, Jean, an American Indian activist, came to the university during this period. They helped establish an American Indian Fellowship at FSU. This influential group led the campus and the community toward a better understanding of Native Americans in general and the Florida Seminoles in particular. The group was instrumental in mediating between the university and the Florida Seminole Indians. There were several meetings between the two, and problems were addressed to the satisfaction of both. As a result, FSU retired certain images that were offensive to the tribe, and began consulting with the tribe regularly on all such matters.

By the late 1970s, FSU’s campus, like the rest of country, had become more educated about Indians in general and the Florida Seminoles in particular. Along with this new understanding came major changes in the university’s mascots. It became very important to portray the university’s namesake with dignity and honor, and to do it with the graces of the Florida Seminole tribe. This attitude culminated in a mutual respect between the two institutions, and further tied their futures to one another.

In 1978, FSU embarked upon a new tradition — one that had the full endorsement of the Seminole Tribe of Florida. A Seminole warrior riding a horse, to become known as Osceola and Renegade, was introduced at FSU home football games, and soon became one of the most enduring and beloved symbols of the university. For more than 30 years, FSU has worked closely with the Seminole Tribe of Florida to ensure the dignity and propriety of the various Seminole symbols used by the university. The university’s goal is to be a model community that treats all cultures with dignity while celebrating diversity.”

A recent article provided these quotations: “Florida State University’s official use of the Seminole name is different from other names in that it does not perpetuate offensive racial stereotypes nor is it meant to diminish or trivialize any Native American or indigenous peoples. Instead, it is used with explicit tribal permission and involvement to honor and promote the Seminole Tribe of Florida’s unconquered history and spirit that persists to this day,” Elizabeth Hirst, FSU’s chief of staff and liaison to the Seminole Tribe, told the Tampa Bay Times in 2020.

“The Tribe views the relationship as a multi-dimensional collaboration that provides meaningful educational opportunities and other positive outcomes,” tribe spokesman Gary Bitner told The Times.

One would think that the same such partnerships could be created elsewhere even at the high school level. The fact that such partnerships are never even considered is a sign of how the dialog has degenerated.

During all these confrontations over Indian logos, they remain quite common for Indian organizations and colleges. Two observations come to mind here. One big difference between Americans and Indians in logos relates to individuals. Americans love individual symbols. Think of Uncle Sam and Liberty as symbols of the country as examples. Even our nation’s capital is named after an individual. By contrast the Indian logos seem more symbolic or metaphorical. I suspect there is a real cultural difference here. That is why in the land of Daniel Nimham a school can be named after fellow American Revolution hero John Jay but not after Nimham.

Second, all these Indian organizations are still named “Indians.” By contrast when Negroes became African American, all Negro organizations were obligated to change their names accordingly. Apparently white people have yet to be as successful in getting Indians to abandon their names and become “Indigenous.” Dr. Ian Record of the National Congress of American Indians used the term “Indians” three times in two sentences (above). On the other hand as the student petition suggests (above), idealized (white) teenagers have now been educated to never use the word “Indian.”

In a previous blog,  (What Are You Doing for the Indian Citizenship Act (1924) Centennial?), I suggested that the Indian Citizen Act centennial provided a convenient opportunity to discuss the ongoing problems related to the place of Indian Nations and Indian individuals in America. Lord knows, there is plenty to discuss. As I read the plethora of news articles from my local paper about mascots, I realize that such discussions are a farfetched pipedream. There can be no “come-let-us-reason-together” in a moral cultural war. There can be no healing in zero-sum confrontations. The stories of Daniel Nimham, Chief Katonah, and the Wappinger Confederacy provide an excellent example of the potential opportunity to begin such a dialog. The absence of his name from the mascot discussions which have been held so far reveal that there is no chance of such healing discussions even being started yet alone succeeding.