Ethics & Responsibilities In Writing American Indian History

American Indian History Or Non-Indian Perceptions Of American Indian History? by Angela Cavender Wilson

1. Who did the writing?
2. Why did they do the writing?
3. how would natives interpret, analyze, question the documents 
4. non-Indian perceptions of American Indian History would be a more appropriate field
5. historians need to consult native sources!
6. works that don’t consult natives are not valid academically
7. oral stories/sources should be included in the research

Purposes Of Stories
8. historical/mythological stories provide moral guidelines 
9. remind young & old of appropriate behavior
10. provide a sense of identity & belonging
11. situate community members within their lineage & establish a relationship to the rest of the world
12. source of entertainment & intimacy between story-teller & audience
13. motivations, decision making processes, explain the “why” of the native worldview

Problems
1. natives have little to say about interpretations, analyses & translations, lack of context, lack of understanding
2. discussions should take place with knowlegable elders
3. natives deserve a place to give input for their history

Ethics & Responsibilities In Writing American Indian History
1. professional ethics & scholarly responsibilities are required
2. tribal knowledge must be treated sensitively
3. natives have/ & continue to be exploited
4. natives have been victimized through land fraud & disease. the manipulation of warriors as mercenaries, the abuse of Indian women & the capture of native children to meet enrollment quotas in boarding schools
5. What should American Indian History be called?
6. Is it history by the outsider’s perspective?
7. history is more subjective so ethics are paramount
8. an Anglo American experience lens is wrong because natives were here already!
9. historians ignored many of the dark episodes of native/white relations
10. white supremacy of calling indians heathen & savages is inappropriate
11. the conqueror’s history has been said to be acceptable 
12. 90% of the literature is written by non-natives
13. many newspapers wrote false articles vilifying natives & historians based their books on false evidence. 
14. interest in native American history picked up in the 1950s
15. native history: explore through the lens of culture, community, environment & metaphysics
16. ethnohistory: anthropology & history to study native American history
17. geographers, sociologists and literary writers have written much of the history
18. historical events can be explored through ethnohistory
19. ethnohistory from a Western point of view suppresses the native point of view 
20. Indian activism/militancy in the 1960s peaked interest
21. occupation of Alcatraz (1969), Bureau of Indian Affairs (1972) & Wounded Knee (1973) sparked interest in native history
22. Native history: history of white/native relations, in North America thousands of years before Columbus & oral history is a major part of their history
23. non-written history is disregarded
24. a dependence on documents eliminates other evidence
25. pottery/weapons is part of the social history > religious/philosophical views
26. Indian history: history of many tribes: relations between tribes, history of diplomatic relations
27. critical revisionist history books are needed
28. conscious/subconscious attitudes guide the teaching of native history
29. Indian history set the foundation for American history!
30. whites had to adjust to America the way natives had for centuries
31. society, culture, environment, climate & metaphysical forces shape the history
32. Indians should not be demeaned
33. non-written data should be included
34. scholars need to challenge the one mainstream view
35. religion influences clan makeup, this should be considered
36. internal & external characteristics of the tribes must be explored
37. language, values, kinship relations, infrastructure, societal norms, tribal beliefs & worldview must be considered
38. written sources-almost exclusively produced by non-natives
39. need knowledge about kinship patterns & political organization
40. a tribal viewpoint is needed
41. negative/arrogant histories are not satisfactory
42. respect for natives & their heritage is important
43. certain cultural rituals shouldn’t be written about
44. consider the worldview of each native group
45. mainstream concepts of reality are not adequate
46. view from perspective of: bureaucrats, missionaries, humanitarian groups & tribal
47. there is no single Indian view of Indian history
48. consider physical & spiritual factors in tribal behavior
49. native history is a complex sociocultural/political history to dissect

American Indian Studies Is For Everyone
1. Raven, Coyote: trickster figures
2. death, sickness, pain, culture, institutions: affected
3. room for Indian & non Indian scholars to study this topic
4. native history is part of the broad history of humanity
5. Indian nations are human groups!
6. specific characteristics of Indian cultures must be considered
7. 500 years of colonial domination
8. rigorous study, fieldwork & a sensitive orientation will reward scholars 
9. Indian scholars: advantage of direct access
10. training, motivation, sensitivity, knowledge, and study are needed
11. Indian scholar: background knowledge, access to informants, etc.
12. non-Indian scholars: driven by theoretical issues, should have access to consenting Indian communities
13. scholars must respect community rules & desires to protect certain info from public view
14. anthropologists of the 1960s and 1970s collected info in an indifferent way

What Is The Value Of American Indian Studies?
1. alternative interpretations of US history are needed
2. non-Indian advisors are recommended