Quote:
Originally posted by AggieSigmaNu361
Well, former Slaves would have probably jumped at the opportunity to recieve money for their land and other naming rights, anything to compensate them.
To me it depends on the time that this written document was written and this 'exchange' was brokered. If this agreement was entered into during the time when other tribes were being slaughtered in the West then it takes on the appearance of the Miami tribe taking the lesser of two evils and recieving compenstation for their land as opposed to facing annhilation.
But i don't know, i'm not a historian of the tribes of that area, nor do i claim to be. I'm merely saying that attitudes of tribes at the time of treaty signing could be completely different that tribal attitudes today.
Kitso
KS 361
|
yes, this did happen in the early 1800's, as Miami was chartered in 1809. and Miami did buy the tribe land in Oklahoma where they still exist to this day. but you are also talking about a relationship that has lasted almost 200 years and is incredibly strong. i don't think that if the tribal attitudes were different today the relationship could have lasted as long. the Tribe does get many benefits at our school, including automatic acceptance and partial to full scholarships. part of me doesn't understand though, how you can compare this tribe, or any tribe, to slaves. it seems like entirely different situations to me.