The Plains Sioux and U.S. Colonialism from Lewis and Clark to Wounded Knee (review)

This book covers one of the most well-recorded and deeply discussed periods in the American history of conflict with and conquest of Native nations and what is arguably the most researched of indigenous peoples. The title itself signals one of the problems the book claims to tackle but instead shows how it clearly reverts to a mainstream orientation: it names the Lakota of the northern plains the "Plains Sioux" and thereby defers to ethno-historical terms rather than indigenous peoples' own names for themselves (in this case Lakota, or perhaps the Teton-wan—more of a linguistic term). Although quite acceptable as an academic practice, the choice of name indicates an orientation toward established scholarly histories rather than an indigenous perspective. I approach this review with that indigenous perspective (which the journal Wicazo Sa Review tries to maintain) paramount in my mind and heart.

Ostler's book is rich in historical detail and extremely well documented, as noted by well-known scholars who supplied it with forewords and jacket statements. It attempts to describe conflicts through the lens of colonialism, although in doing so it glosses over the primary objective of the Lewis and Clark expedition as made by President Jefferson: to declare to the Indians—and, ominously, the only named tribe, the "teton-wan" Sioux—that the great "White Father" was to be their new "sovereigns of the country" (see my article on the expedition, cowritten with Mary Louise Defender-Wilson). Since the last two hundred years of historical conflict between Native nations and the United States has been over sovereignty in one form or another, this is a major point of contention with this book, which purportedly describes the nineteenth century as a whole but mainly focuses on conflicts arising from what the author calls "the Great Sioux War" and killings at Wounded Knee. Although this book contributes to these discussions, it should have kept the entire century in focus.

Only a few pages are given to these early years, or to the decades following that included the first Fort Laramie Treaty of 1851 and other treaties that in my own work (Fenelon 1998) I refer to as "multi-tribal compacts" including at least ten Native nations from the region. Much can be learned about the United States' intention in establishing these early treaties, when U.S. military intervention and invasion was not yet a viable option. However, the book implies that the U.S. justification of establishing "peace" with the warring tribes was one, perhaps the main, reason for these early negotiations. This accepts the false premise that Native nations and especially the Lakota "Sioux" were almost always at war with one another and that the Lakota had recently invaded the region itself and were attacking the established riverine peoples. Other mainstream scholars have done a great disservice to Lakota history by stressing these relatively minor divisions within the Lakota peoples, amplified by violent conflicts with nearby Native nations, and suggesting that the United States was instrumental in "pacifying" the Plains Sioux because of intertribal warfare. Ostler supports this contention (23) in referring to Richard White's "Winning of the West," a work that, to my mind at least, attempts to justify the militaristic invasions by suggesting that the Lakota were engaged in similar invasions but with less "planning" and effect. All this dissonance is further tested by the simple observation that after the Grattan conflict and up to the larger-scale war that erupted in 1866 the U.S. government and military sent armed forces into the region to kill "Indians" and the Sioux "hostiles" in retaliation for the 1862 Dakota uprisings (and other conflicts). This is well-documented in Ostler's references to the Harney, Sibley, Sully, and other armed campaigns that killed "Sioux" indiscriminately, practicing what I would call small-scale quasi-genocidal acts that were a prelude of what was to come.

Ostler does not fully discuss his ideas...