1

Trail of Tears in the Appalachian history

Name

Institution

Professor

Date
 2

Introduction

Despite representing a dark past, the Trail of Tears is one of the most important aspects of

Appalachian history. The Appalachian region covers thirteen states, stretching southward from

New York to Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi (Nelson, 2017). The region is named after the

Appalachian Mountains spreading along it. Today, Appalachia is renowned for aspects such as

coal mining and the presence of numerous cultures, races, and ethnicities (Nelson, 2017).

However, one of the unforgettable aspects of its history is the experience of the native Indians

living in the southern Appalachian Mountains in the 1830s (Nelson, 2017). The principal

inhabitants of the region were five main native American tribes, namely Seminole, Muscogee

Creek, Choctaw, Chickasaw, and Cherokee.

However, the Appalachian region became of great interest to the white settlers from

Europe and other parts of the U.S. They wanted to use the fertile lands in the region for farming.

The discovery of gold in Georgia increased their interest (Barnett, 2015). Thus, the whites

pushed for the removal of the native Indians from the region by the federal and state government.

The displacement occurred in parts of Tennessee, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, and North

Carolina, coveted by white settlers in the 1830s (Barnett, 2015). They were displaced to a region

in the west of Mississippi called designated as “Indian Territory.” The removal remains an

important part of the region's history because it involved painful acts of brutality against the

targeted Indian tribes (Barnett, 2015). The Cherokee had the most severe experience during the

forced displacement. The phrase "Trail of Tears" refers to the Indian's painful experiences during

displacement.

In addition to reminding the Indians and other Americans of the painful experiences

during the forceful removal, the “Trail of Tears” provides history about the distribution of the
 3

Indians in the Eastern parts of the U.S. and the presence of diverse cultures today. Also, the

information sensitizes the need to avoid adopting policies or strategies meant to oppress minority

groups within society. In this regard, this paper describes how the natives were removed from the

Appalachian region, their adverse experiences, and their impacts on Americans today. The paper

illustrates why the "trail of Tears" is an important aspect of Appalachian culture.

Background History

As the whites continued settling and colonizing the U.S. before the 19th century, they

engaged in conflicts with the Native Americans. The conflicts occurred mainly in situations

where the white settlers strived to encroach on the lands of the native Americans (Egiebor &

Foster, 2018). However, the region between Mississippi and the Appalachian Mountains was

recognized as an Indian Territory during the 1763 British proclamation (Egiebor & Foster, 2018).

Thus, the white settlers were not supposed to encroach on it. Thus, the focus of the whites turned

to assimilate the Native Indians. The settlers introduced the Indians to European culture,

Christianity, and new economic activities, including European-style farming (Egiebor & Foster,

2018). They also introduced formal education in the region. By the early 19th century, many

Indians were assimilated. They had plantations where they grew new crops, including cotton.

Also, they bought and used enslaved people like the white settlers in their plantations (Egiebor &

Foster, 2018). As such, they considered themselves superior to other non-white ethnic groups,

including the blacks. The assimilation led the Indians between Mississippi and the Appalachian

Mountains to be regarded as the "Five Civilized Tribes" (Egiebor & Foster, 2018). Despite the

proclamation, the white settlers still coveted the fertile lands in the region and were determined

to access them.
 4

The effort to displace the native Indians was evident in the white settlers' creation of the

narrative of "vanishing Indian." The settlers spread the myth to imply that as new ethnic groups

and races entered the region and assimilation of the natives occurred, the Indian population was

reduced (Bowes, 2016). One of the aims of the narrative was to spread the notion that the white

settlers would be okay to settle in the region since it was no longer an Indian Territory. A series

of wars and conflicts emerged in the early 19th century between the Indians and the white settlers

due to land encroachment efforts by the latter (Bowes, 2016). A good example is the 1813 Creek

War. However, the effort increased significantly after the gold discovery in Georgia in 1828. The

white settlers rushed to the region to mine and benefited from the gold (Bowes, 2016). Thus, they

pushed the federal government to evict the Indians, specifically the Cherokee, who lived in the

region. By then, the Indian tribes existed as independent nations. For instance, the Cherokee had

laws, leaders, chiefs, and courts (Bowes, 2016). In response to the pressure from the white

settlers, Georgia strived to nullify the Cherokee courts and laws (Bowes, 2016). Also, the state

strived to assert jurisdiction over the land owned by the Cherokee.

Role of Jacksonian Presidency and Indian Removal Act

President Andrew Jackson's actions played a significant role in the forceful eviction of

the native Indians. Evicting the native Indians was one of the top goals of his presidency.

Remarkably, their efforts by Jackson to evict the Indians started decades before becoming

president (Sinha, 2019). As a military commander, he had led battles against the native Indians,

partially intending to displace them. For instance, he led the 1813-1814 Creek War. He also

gained a reputation as a ruthless fighter against the Indians during the 1817-1818 Seminole War.

During the wars, Jackson presided over the relocation of the Indians after defeating them in wars

to the West of Mississippi (Sinha, 2019). In his view, relocating and replacing the Indians with
 5

white settlers was necessary to facilitate economic growth. He believed the white settlers would

better utilize the fertile lands than the native Indians. After becoming the president, Jackson

expressed his intention to evict the Native Americans in his initial address to Congress (Sinha,

2019). Although he did not initiate the Indian Removal Act, he pushed Congress to pass it.

During the initial address, President Jackson stated that the Indians should voluntarily move out

of their ancestral lands. He promised the government support that would be offered to the Indians

that abided (Sinha, 2019). He repeated the message in subsequent addresses and speeches.

Ultimately, his efforts influenced Congress to pass the Act in 1830.

The Indian Removal Act had several components. First, it extinguished the entitlement of

the native Indians to the lands located south of the Appalachian Mountains. At the same time, the

Act established an Indian Territory on the western side of the Mississippi river (Bowes, 2016).

Further, the Act required the federal government to take lands belonging to the native Indians in

Appalachia's southern states. In exchange, the Indians would be given lands in the Indian

Territory (Bowes, 2016). The destination was regarded as Indian Territory. The Act allowed the

president to authorize the use of force against the Indians that refused to move out of their lands

voluntarily. According to the Act, the Indians who moved out voluntarily should be compensated.

The government would also cater for their expenses during the relocation and settlement in the

Indian Territory (Bowes, 2016). At the same time, the Act required the government to negotiate

and create treaties with the Indian nations. The treaties were meant to facilitate smooth relocation

(Bowes, 2016). As required in the Act, the Bureau of Indian Affairs was created to manage

relocation operations and facilitate the movement and settlement of the Indians.

However, the Indian Removal Act is that it did not end the statutory argument that the

native Indians existed as independent nations. Despite this, Georgia increased its effort to assert
 6

control of the native Indian’s sovereignty and land (Martinez, 2018). In reaction, the Cherokee

community took a case to the U.S. Supreme Court in 1831, challenging Georgia's government

authorities. The Cherokee communities insisted that they were sovereign and had the right to

occupy their ancestral land (Martinez, 2018). However, the Court ruled against the Cherokees. In

the ruling by Justice John Marshall, the Court stated that the Cherokee community was not a

sovereign nation. Instead, they were domestic and dependent communities. Also, the Court ruled

that the Cherokees were under federal rule (Martinez, 2018). The ruling led states such as

Georgia to increase efforts of forcefully displacing the native Indians. However, the Court

overturned the decision in 1832 in Worcester v. Georgia (Martinez, 2018). The case involved a

missionary called Samuel Worcester, who was convicted by the state of Georgia for living and

owning land without a license in Georgia. Worcester argued that Georgia's laws could not apply

to him since he was granted land by the Cherokee nation (Martinez, 2018). Thus, the question

arose regarding whether the Cherokee community was a sovereign nation with the right to own

land in Georgia. The Court Ruled in favor of both the Cherokee community and Worcester. In its

ruling, the Court stated that Cherokee was an independent and sovereign community with the

right to own land in Georgia (Martinez, 2018). Also, it stated that Georgia violated federal laws

by attempting to exert control over the Cherokee. Despite the ruling, the Court did not mandate

the federal marshals to execute the decision (Martinez, 2018). Thus, President Jackson was not

obligated to enforce the ruling. Although he was expected to abide by the ruling, President

Jackson took advantage of the loophole (Reyhner & Eder, 2017). He continued supporting the

Indian displacement from their lands. However, he strived to negotiate various treaties with the

five tribes affected. The displacement of the different tribes did not take place at the same time
 7

(Martinez, 2018). Also, the tribes reacted differently to the requirements to move out of their

lands.

Experiences of the Five Indian Tribes

Choctaw

The removal process of the Choctaw community started with the Treaty of Dancing

Rabbit Creek in 1831. By then, the community members lived in Louisiana, Alabama, and

Mississippi (Watkins, 2018). The treaty ceded the land where the Choctaw community lived to

the United States. Based on the treaty, the Choctaws were supposed to cede the land and move to

the Indian Territory in exchange for new land, transport, and financial support (Watkins, 2018).

However, the Choctaw agreed that some community members would remain in their ancestral

lands. President Jackson was amazed that the Choctaw did not express significant resistance

(Watkins, 2018). The federal government planned for the members of the community to be

transported using wagons and steamboats. During the removal, however, the Choctaws were

exposed to harsh weather conditions. In some cases, for instance, the community members

traveled when the temperatures were below zero (Watkins, 2018). They were also exposed to

starvation and diseases. The harsh conditions sometimes prevented the use of transportation

means provided by the government. Thus, the members had to walk long distances toward the

targeted destination. Approximately 17,000 members of the community were removed from their

ancestral homes (Watkins, 2018). Due to the harsh conditions they experienced, at least 3000

people died on the way (Watkins, 2018). The removal of the Choctaw ended in 1833. The

Choctaw community members in the ancestral homes experienced intimidation, harassment, and

legal conflict from the white settlers. At least 5,000 members of the community did not move out

of their lands (Watkins, 2018). They experienced harassment and intimidation in various ways.
 8

For instance, the white settlers sometimes burned and tore down their habitations. Others were

personally abused and beaten until they died. Despite this, the Choctaw community members

that reached the Indian Territory expressed significant resilience (Watkins, 2018). They managed

to maintain their cultural traditions and rebuild their community. This explains why the

Choctaws are among the largest native Indian communities in the U.S. that have succeeded in

maintaining their cultural heritage.

Seminole

The federal government invited the members of the Seminole community to the Treaty of

Payne's Landing in 1832, which required them to cede their land and move to the Indian

Territory. By then, the community lived in Florida (Hamen, 2019). Several chiefs met

government officials and signed the treaty. However, most Seminoles rejected the treaty,

compelling the chiefs to abandon it. The chiefs that signed it argued that they did not have the

power to represent the views and wishes of all the Seminoles. Some stated that they were

compelled to sign the treaty. As such, the Seminoles expressed explicit resistance to the

government (Hamen, 2019). Instead of moving from their lands, they established strategies for

protecting their families and properties by fighting against the military troops and white settlers.

The resistance led to an emergence of a severe war that started in 1832 (Hamen, 2019). During

the war, the Seminoles used Guarilia tactics. They invaded government troops, killed them, and

store weapons. Chief Osceola is renowned as one of the most persons that led the Seminole

worriers during the invasions. Many Seminoles also died during the wars until 1842 (Hamen,

2019). By the end of the wars, most of the remaining Seminoles agreed to emigrate to the Indian

Territory. Thus, the government claimed to be victorious during the war. However, a small group

of Seminoles remained in Florida (Hamen, 2019). Remarkably, the Seminoles experienced

 9

significant hardships during the wars and deaths. After relocating, however, they expressed

resilience, like the Choctaw. They rebuilt their community and regained their culture.

Muscogee Creek

By 1830, the Creeks lived in Alabama, Georgia, and Florida. In the earlier wars and

engagements with the government, the Creeks had already signed treaties giving away their land.

A good example is the 1825 treaty of Indian Springs (Miller & Ethridge, 2023). In 1832, the

government compelled the Creeks to sign the Treaty of Cusseta. The treaty required the Creek

land to be subdivided and allotted to individuals. The individuals were supposed to sell the land

to the settlers or get compensation for leaving it and moving to the Indian Territory (Miller &

Ethridge, 2023). The state and federal governments used force to expel the creeks from the lands.

During the process of moving to the Indian Territory, they experienced starvation, diseases, and

other hardships. Also, they were constantly invaded by the military and vigilantes (Miller &

Ethridge, 2023). Estimates indicate that around 4,000 creeks died during the removal.

Chickasaw

Before removal, Chickasaw lived in Kentucky, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Alabama.

Initially, after the enactment of the Indian Removal Act, they expressed resistance to

displacement by the federal government (Hamen, 2019). By 1836, however, most agreed with

the government to move to the Indian Territory. In return, they would get financial compensation

and use the cash to buy land from the Choctaw tribe members already settled in the region

(Hamen, 2019). They also experienced harsh conditions during the journey to the Indian

Territory.

Cherokee
 10

Before forceful eviction, the Cherokee lived in present-day Georgia, Alabama, North

Carolina, and Tennessee. The federal government convinced them to move to the Indian Territory

for many years. In 1838, the federal government gave them six months to pack their belongings

and move out of their lands (Basso, 2016). By the expiry of the deadline, around 1200 Cherokees

had moved voluntarily. The rest resisted. In response, the federal government ordered the

military to evict resisting Cherokees forcefully. Initially, they were concentrated in camps after

eviction, where they experienced brutal treatment from the military (Basso, 2016). For instance,

many Cherokees were brutally beaten by the military. The properties of the resisting Cherokees

were destroyed, stolen, and burned during the process. Also, Afterward, they were forced to walk

over 1000 miles to the Indian Territory. During the eviction and journey, over 4,000 Cherokees

died (Basso, 2016). Ultimately, the Cherokee experienced the loss of culture

Conclusion

Overall, Indian removal from their ancestral lands in the 1830s and early 1840s is one of

the aspects that cannot be easily deleted from Appalachian history. The history describes the

painful and brutal atrocities perpetrated against the Indian nations in the Southern Appalachian

Mountains by the white settlers, leaders, and the government. The atrocities were extreme to the

extent that they were regarded as a Trail of Tears. The history also describes how encounters with

the white settlers diluted the culture of the native Indians and the efforts they made to restore it.

As explained, president Jackson played a major role in supporting the brutality against the native

Indians. His regime significantly violated the rights of the Indians after the enactment of the

Indian Removal Act. The government failed to abide by the Supreme Court ruling stating that the

native Indians had a right to own their ancestral land and were sovereign nations. As noted, the

five tribes reacted differently to the requirement by the federal government to move out of their
 11

ancestral lands. However, they had similar experiences on the journey to the Indian Territory.

They suffered from diseases, starvation, and exposure to harsh climatic conditions. Those who

resisted experienced the destruction of their properties, intimidation, and brutal acts, including

beatings. As argued, the Trail of Tears will always remind Americans and others to avoid

adopting strategies or making decisions meant to oppress minority ethnic or racial groups.

References

Barnett, A. (2015). Riding the Trail of Tears by Blake M. Hausman. The American Indian

Quarterly, 39(2), 238-241.

Basso, A. R. (2016). Towards a Theory of Displacement Atrocities: The Cherokee Trail of

Tears, The Herero Genocide, and The Pontic Greek Genocide. Genocide Studies and

Prevention: An International Journal, 10(1), 5-29. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.5038/1911-

9933.10.1.1297

Bowes, J. P. (2016). Land Too Good for Indians: Northern Indian Removal (Vol. 13). University

of Oklahoma Press.

Egiebor, E. E., & Foster, E. J. (2018). Traveling through the trail of tears. The Geography

Teacher, 15(3), 129-138. https://doi.org/10.1080/19338341.2018.1491876

Hamen, S. E. (2019). The Indian Removal Act and the Trail of Tears. Weigl Publishers.

Martinez, D. (2018). Documents of American Indian Removal. ABC-CLIO.

Miller, R. J., & Ethridge, R. (2023). A Promise Kept: The Muscogee (Creek) Nation and McGirt

V. Oklahoma. University of Oklahoma Press.

Nelson, K. R. (2017). The Trail of Tears: A Journey of Loss. Greenhaven Publishing LLC.

 12

Reyhner, J., & Eder, J. (2017). American Indian education: A history. University of Oklahoma

Press.

Sinha, M. (2019). Afterword: The History and Legacy of Jacksonian Democracy. Journal of the

Early Republic, 39(1), 145-148. doi: 10.1353/jer.2019.0012

Watkins, J. E. (2018). The story of the Choctaw Indians: From the past to the present. ABC

CLIO.
13