Unit III Reflection

Quinn Murry

18 February 2023
 As with the two previous units, the course reading in Unit III served primarily to

introduce new material to me. My education in early American history was limited to one

designed to instill a sense of American exceptionalism, and I was loath to pursue further study of

U.S. history.1 As a consequence, I could, and have identified, without hyperbole, hundreds of

historical items from this unit’s readings which I was not acquainted with. Some of this new

information is so self-evident I cannot help but be disappointed in myself for not putting it

together myself. For example, even though I was taught about the Trail of Tears and knew that

native tribes covered most of the Americas, it never dawned on me that the Cherokee or other

relocated peoples were being forced into conflict with other native tribes (Roberts, 2021). Yet

this is most certainly something I should have realized. Other elements of the readings, such as

the slave-owner status of the Five Tribes and other tribes, were vaguely familiar but presented in

greater detail than I had previously considered (Roberts, 2021). Veritably, I could fill these three

pages with detailed descriptions of all the historical insights I had acquired. Insomuch as

highlighting my progression, that would do little, as the most significant learning from this unit

came not from the histories told but from who the text focused on.

Throughout the first two units, I came to understand my approach to history as flawed. In

this unit, I realized – laughably late – that the primary flaw, is that I rarely considered the

1
At the time, I diagnosed timing and business as the primary cause of this reluctance. In retrospect, I now see that it
was primarily caused by my own incuriosity towards American history, and feelings of discomfort – primarily
linked to concerns of being perceived as exhibiting white saviorism, or worse morbid curiosity – in studying the
histories of minorities in the U.S.
impacts of events on non-primary actors. That is to say, I situated my historical perspectives on

the actor texts, and lecturers focused on. This meant that in euro and white-centric classes. I

concentrated on the actions of white settlers but rarely on the impacts – beyond simple statistics

– of them upon others. Thus, my understanding of the forced migration of the Cherokee

considered only the immediate effects on them – the resulting deaths and loss of land – but any

considerations of its long-term consequences were centered on the “primary actors” in my

understanding of history: the instigators, colonizers, and oppressors.

Simply put, in my readings of history, I failed to recognize or consider the agency – or

the loss thereof – of all actors involved in history. As a consequence, I never delved into history

beyond viewing it as a simple set of facts to be memorized. For me, I've Been Here All the While

served as the catalyst for this realization. Particularly impactful was a simple analysis of

slavery’s evolution2 among Native communities, noting that “though a form of Indigenous

involuntary labor and captive-taking existed before European contact, Native bondage was

neither transgenerational nor racial and hereditary before the eighteenth century.” (Roberts,

2021, 23). Before enrolling in this course, I was familiar with slavery in the Americas prior to the

arrival of the Europeans. Yet, I had not considered its adaptation or transformation under the new

information and cultural and societal circumstances presented by the arrival of settlers.

Beyond that, I am not certain I considered Native American practices or cultures to be

malleable, evolving things3. Their presentation to me was always in relation to the white settlers,

and any perspectives offered were that of the white view of them. What I am confident of,

however, is that I exhibited – and perhaps continue to exhibit – what I have critiqued throughout

2
I cannot find a better word than this – but find the word has an unfortunately positive connotation in my mind which fails to match the horrors
of slavery.
3 That is not to say I thought of their cultures as fixed, but rather that I did not think of them at all.
this quarter: a perspective that omits or forgets the agency of actors to commit atrocities and

violence, even as it is committed upon them. As a consequence, the intentionality of racialized

enslavement, the ratification of strict prejudicial legal codes, and the efforts to hierarchize race

were both surprising and unknown to me – despite further review making it

clear, such a surprise should not have occurred.

Likewise, I found myself surprised – as a consequence of my limited previous

investigation or intentional examination – of the varying treatment of black and indigenous

Americans by white Americans and Indian Agents post-emancipation. I had considered that such

a quick shift in the hierarchy could occur. While it no longer surprises me – having read about it

in greater detail – I am nevertheless – curious about the origin of this shift and its long-term

impacts on American society and political and cultural identities. I hope the last unit will provide

further insight into this topic.

Setting the texts and their topics' unfamiliarity to me aside, I found myself routinely

challenged in our class discussions in this unit. Particularly in our second week (Week 7)

discourse on farming as a legacy of settler colonialism and imperialism. It was a topic I had not

considered and a connection I had not made. Beyond that, I found myself grappling with feelings

of romanticism towards the American dream that agriculture represented to me, as well as my

understanding of the processes that enabled it to exist. I was also left with more questions.

Discussing with Friday after class, I recalled family members' stories of their being used as

buffer class between the elites and those below them in the racial and socio-economic hierarchy.

I feel confident that something like that exists today, yet not being in this group myself, I

struggle to identify what that might be. Is it the middle class? Or does the “buffer” still exist

along social and racial lines as well? If so, what is its relationship to the legacy of colonial
settlers, and is it an experience, arrangement, and perspective that is unique to countries like the

United States, which are founded by and inhabited by the ancestors of settler colonizers?

Moreover, I was left wondering how we can properly address these legacies when talking to

those for whom the most noticeable “benefits” of settler colonialism have faded. That is to say,

how do you discuss this with farm owners on taken land when there is no more economic benefit

to agriculture?
 References

Roberts, A. E. (2021). I’ve been here all the while. Black Freedom on Native Land. University of
Pennsylvania Press.

Walkiewicz, K. (2023). Reading territory: Indigenous and Black Freedom, removal, and the
nineteenth-Century state. The University of North Carolina Press.