Architects of Erasure: How Colonial Figures Forged Native American Policy
The history of Native Americans in what became the United States is a narrative profoundly shaped by contact, conflict, and the often-contradictory policies enacted by European colonial powers and, later, the nascent American republic. Far from being passive implementers of abstract decrees, specific colonial figures—governors, religious leaders, military commanders, and even philosophers—acted as the primary architects of these policies, imprinting their individual ideologies, ambitions, and prejudices onto the land and its Indigenous inhabitants. Their decisions, often made in the crucible of expansion and cultural clash, laid the groundwork for centuries of dispossession, assimilation, and resistance, the echoes of which resonate to this day.
From the earliest Spanish conquistadors to the British administrators and the founding fathers of America, these figures were not mere administrators; they were visionaries, for better or worse, whose personal convictions translated into official policy, dictating the very terms of existence for Native peoples. Understanding their roles requires delving into the specific contexts of their actions, acknowledging the often-brutal realities they imposed, and recognizing the enduring legacy of their choices.
The Spanish Crucible: Conquest and Conversion
The Spanish entrada into the Americas was driven by a potent mix of gold, glory, and God. Figures like Juan de Oñate, who led the colonization of New Mexico in 1598, epitomized the Spanish approach to Native policy: absolute subjugation and forced conversion, backed by overwhelming military force. Oñate’s infamous response to the Acoma Pueblo rebellion in 1599 serves as a chilling testament to his philosophy. After a brief siege, his forces massacred hundreds of Acoma people, and for the surviving men, Oñate ordered the amputation of one foot as an "exemplary punishment." This brutal act was not an anomaly but a clear demonstration of a policy designed to terrorize, crush resistance, and establish Spanish dominance unequivocally.
Oñate’s actions, while extreme, were rooted in the Requerimiento, a Spanish declaration read to Indigenous peoples, demanding their submission to the Pope and the Spanish Crown, or face war. This document, often read in Spanish to non-Spanish speakers, offered a veneer of legality to conquest and became a foundational, if cynical, piece of "policy" dictating the terms of engagement with Native populations across vast swathes of the continent. The Spanish model, heavily influenced by figures like Oñate and the Dominican friars who sought both conversion and control, established a legacy of forced labor (encomienda, repartimiento), cultural suppression, and a hierarchical social order with Indigenous peoples at the bottom.
The English Experiment: From Coexistence to Conflict
In the English colonies, Native policy evolved differently, often reflecting the immediate needs of survival and the differing philosophies of individual leaders. John Smith, a pivotal figure in the early Jamestown settlement (1607), initially navigated a complex and often perilous relationship with the powerful Powhatan Confederacy. Smith’s pragmatic approach, characterized by a mix of trade, diplomacy, and occasional intimidation, was born of necessity. The early colonists were utterly dependent on Native knowledge and resources for survival. Smith famously declared, "He who does not work, shall not eat," but the work he referred to often included trade and negotiation with the Powhatan, led by Chief Powhatan.
Smith’s early policies, however, were ultimately unsustainable against the tide of English expansion. His temporary success in maintaining a fragile peace gave way to escalating conflicts as more settlers arrived, demanding more land. The evolving English policy shifted from uneasy coexistence to outright warfare, culminating in the Anglo-Powhatan Wars, which dramatically reduced the Powhatan population and confined survivors to reservations. Smith’s initial attempts at diplomacy were an early, albeit fleeting, form of "policy" that temporarily averted outright war, but the long-term trend was set by the insatiable demand for land.
Further north, William Bradford, the long-serving governor of Plymouth Colony, also played a crucial role in shaping early English-Native relations. Bradford’s leadership was instrumental in forging a treaty with Massasoit, the sachem of the Wampanoag, in 1621. This alliance, facilitated by Tisquantum (Squanto), was a cornerstone of Plymouth’s early survival, ensuring mutual defense and trade. Bradford’s policy, driven by religious conviction and the desperate need for security, initially fostered a period of relative peace.
However, as the Puritan population grew and their land hunger intensified, the policy of alliance began to fray. Bradford himself, in his chronicle Of Plimoth Plantation, documents the increasing tensions and the colonists’ growing suspicion of their Native neighbors. The seeds of future conflict, culminating in King Philip’s War (1675-1678) under Massasoit’s son Metacom, were sown during this period of expansion. Bradford’s initial policy of cooperative coexistence, while a landmark in early colonial history, ultimately could not withstand the pressures of demographic growth and differing worldviews.
Alternative Visions: Treaty and Respect
Amidst the prevailing trends of conquest and conflict, some colonial figures offered alternative, albeit often fragile, models of Native American policy. Roger Williams, a radical Puritan banished from Massachusetts Bay Colony for advocating for religious freedom and fair dealings with Native peoples, stands out. In 1636, Williams founded Rhode Island, purchasing land from the Narragansett and Wampanoag rather than simply seizing it. His belief that the King had no right to grant land already belonging to Indigenous people was revolutionary.
Williams’s policy was one of genuine respect for Native sovereignty and cultural integrity. He learned their languages, engaged in extensive diplomacy, and maintained peaceful relations throughout his life, famously declaring that "forced religion stinks in God’s nostrils," extending this principle to cultural coercion. While Rhode Island’s later history saw its own conflicts, Williams’s foundational policy of negotiation, purchase, and respect for Native rights stands as a stark contrast to the dominant colonial approach, demonstrating that peaceful coexistence was indeed possible when leaders prioritized justice over conquest.
Similarly, William Penn, the Quaker founder of Pennsylvania, envisioned a "Holy Experiment" built on fair dealings and peace with Native Americans. In 1681, Penn signed his "Great Treaty" with the Lenape (Delaware) people, a pact famously described by Voltaire as "the only treaty between those people and the Christians that was not ratified by an oath, and that was never infringed." Penn’s policy mandated that all land acquired from Native peoples be purchased fairly and that disputes be settled by a jury of six colonists and six Natives.
Penn’s personal philosophy, rooted in Quaker pacifism and a belief in the inherent dignity of all people, directly translated into a remarkably peaceful relationship with the Lenape for over 70 years. He instructed his agents to "not abuse them, but treat them with humanity and kindness." This policy stood in stark contrast to the bloody conflicts plaguing neighboring colonies and demonstrated the profound impact a leader’s personal ethics could have on intergroup relations. Unfortunately, subsequent Pennsylvanian administrators did not always uphold Penn’s high standards, and the infamous "Walking Purchase" of 1737 ultimately dispossessed the Lenape of vast territories, highlighting the fragility of even the most well-intentioned policies when confronted by settler expansionism.
The American Republic: Assimilation and Removal
Even after independence, the patterns of Native American policy remained deeply influenced by the colonial mindset, merely shifting from imperial decree to republican legislation. George Washington, as the first U.S. President, articulated a "civilization policy" aimed at assimilating Native Americans into American society. Guided by his Secretary of War, Henry Knox, Washington’s policy encouraged Native peoples to adopt Euro-American farming practices, education, and Christianity, believing this was the only way they could survive in the face of relentless white expansion.
Washington stated, "The general government will be disposed to make every exertion to give them a participation in the blessings of civilization." This benevolent-sounding policy, however, was inherently coercive, demanding the abandonment of traditional cultures and land-use practices. It represented a direct evolution of colonial-era thinking that viewed Native cultures as inferior and in need of "improvement" or outright replacement.
The policy of assimilation eventually gave way to the more aggressive and devastating policy of removal, largely championed by Andrew Jackson, who rose to prominence as a military leader fighting Native Americans and later as President. Jackson’s personal animosity and expansionist fervor were central to the passage of the Indian Removal Act of 1830. Despite Supreme Court rulings like Worcester v. Georgia (1832), which affirmed Cherokee sovereignty, Jackson famously defied the judiciary, reportedly stating, "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it."
Jackson’s policy, driven by a desire for Native lands for cotton cultivation and white settlement, culminated in the forced displacement of the "Five Civilized Tribes" (Cherokee, Choctaw, Chickasaw, Creek, and Seminole) from their ancestral lands in the southeastern United States to Indian Territory (present-day Oklahoma)—the tragic "Trail of Tears." Jackson’s personal will and political power transformed a long-held colonial desire for land into a federal policy of ethnic cleansing, forever scarring the American landscape and its Indigenous peoples.
The Enduring Legacy
The individual actions and philosophies of these colonial and early American figures were not isolated incidents but interconnected threads forming the tapestry of Native American policy. From Oñate’s brutal subjugation to Williams’s enlightened respect, from Penn’s peaceful treaties to Jackson’s forceful removal, each figure left an indelible mark. Their policies, whether rooted in conquest, survival, religious conviction, or economic ambition, collectively established precedents that dictated land tenure, legal status, cultural interaction, and ultimately, the very survival of Indigenous nations.
The profound impact of these specific individuals underscores a critical truth: history is not merely a product of abstract forces but is actively shaped by the choices, biases, and leadership of particular people. The policies they forged, often with little regard for Native perspectives or rights, created a legacy of broken treaties, cultural devastation, and enduring injustices. Understanding their roles is not just an academic exercise; it is essential for comprehending the present-day struggles of Native American communities for self-determination, sovereignty, and the reclamation of their ancestral heritage. The shadows cast by these architects of policy continue to lengthen across the American landscape, demanding recognition and ongoing efforts toward reconciliation.
