"When We Were First Paid"\nThe Blackfoot Treaty, The Western Tribes, And\nThe Creation Of The Common Hunting Ground, 1855
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In mid-October of 1855, Blackfoot Treaty commissioner Isaac 1. Stevens, governor of Washington Territory and ex-officio its superintendent of Indian Affairs, and his co-commissioner Colonel Alfred Cumming, head of the Central Superintendency including Nebraska Territory, finally assembled the Blackfoot Peace Council just below the confluence of the Judith and Missouri Rivers. The federal government through the Office of Indian Affairs by then had already pieced together a new reservation policy for the West. This "new order of things," largely designed by Commissioner of Indian Affairs George Manypenny, hoped to reduce white conflicts with Indians, to prevent, if possible, expensive military actions, and above all to extinguish Indian land title by purchase, thereby enabling "legitimate" white settlement. In doing so, the new policy went well beyond the government's earlier and more limited goals of keeping immigrant trails free of hostile Indians and of creating a peaceful, federal dispensation or order on the Great Plains by means of annual compensation.1\nThe Blackfoot Council and the treaty that emerged from it, often termed Lame Bull's Treaty, however, did not fit the new reservation policy. It extinguished no aboriginal land title through land sales or cessions, nor did it provide for Indian removal to reservations where the government could establish schools, hospitals, and mills and provide farming instruction and moral guidance. Nor did the treaty advance the division of communal lands in order to allot small parcels to individual Indians. It was not a so-called land treaty at all; it was a peace treaty. And it contained a surprise-the federal creation of a common hunting ground. This designated area was to be shared "in peace" by the Blackfoot tribes and what were termed the "Western Indians," those who had come from west of the Rocky Mountains, across the continental divide, from the drainages of the Columbia River. These Western Indians were the Nez Perce, Yakima, Walla Walla, Cayuse, Kootenai, Spokane, and numerous Salish speakers, most prominently the Flathead and the Pend d'Oreille.\nThe formal establishment of such a common hunting ground in October of 1855 flew in the face of much of the emergent reservation policy. Instead of being encouraged to establish fixed and permanent homes, namely reservations, for exclusive tribal use, and to stay put, Stevens's federal recognition and formal establishment of a "buffalo commons" stimulated the bison hunters of the Columbia River drainages to continue their long, seasonal migrations to the contested buffalo plains centered at the headwaters of the Missouri and Yellowstone Rivers just as they had always done.\nWhere did the Blackfoot Treaty commissioners find the precedent for such a common hunting ground and what lay behind their willingness to establish it on the buffalo plains? Could this divergent, if not contradictory, regional determination in the Far West be reconciled with the prevailing federal reservation policy as determined by the Office of Indian Affairs? Or was that unnecessary, given that American reservation policy in the 1850s was by its nature contradictory, little more than a series of regional improvisations?2\nCommissioners Stevens and Cumming, of course, did not actually "create" the common hunting ground. They simply acknowledged and restructured the reality of a preexisting Indian common hunting ground, a sort of buffalo commons, that gradually over the years had been constructed through war, treaties, and diplomacy on the part of the tribes themselves. Stevens had first encountered this dynamic tribal creation with its shifting boundaries and alliances when he led a congressionally funded transcontinental railroad survey through the middle of Blackfoot territory in 1853. Two years later, not only did treaty commissioners Stevens and Cumming recognize this Indian construction in the treaty provisions in 1855, they gave it an inordinate amount of attention. What were their goals and expectations regarding the federal definition, limitation, and reshaping of this preexisting regional Indian commons? How did these purposes relate to possible repercussions for a bison population, already perceived to be dwindling on the Northern Plains?
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».