Kathleen DuVal

I have to say, this book genuinely recalibrated of my sense of North American history, and frankly, of history in general. DuVal certainly doesn’t stick to the same old Eurocentric history we’re all familiar with. Neither does she simply add Native viewpoints to that perspective. Honestly, she begins with a completely different framework—one that truly centers Native Americans, filling out a surprising history of their pre-contact era(s), illustrating their dominance across most of the show more continent even well after Europeans’ arrival, and showing that the European takeover of the continent was far less inevitable than most narratives make it seem. What she ends up with is not the story of a “discovery,” but of an ongoing contest among powerful and deeply rooted nations, each with its own strategies, politics, and adaptability.

The book takes on a massive historical scope and covers it quite well for a single, broad work. For me, at least, each era had new discoveries: the pre-contact societies with their complex trade and diplomacy;the idea of a rise and subsequent fall of massive urban societies (until now I had thought of “post-urban” societies as an apocalyptic literary trope, not a historical phenomenon); the first two centuries of contact, where Native American alliances and rivalries thoroughly superseded the influence of European immigrants; the grim transition to a modern order defined by dispossession and resistance; and the uninterrupted cultures which survived it, now struggling mightily to find ways to thrive.

Possibly the most striking revelation—even though I thought I had already wrapped my head around it years ago—was the sheer savagery of the British colonial project. DuVal makes clear how deliberately their violence & inhumanity functioned as the tools of conquest—not just against Native nations, but against the European rivals who had preceded them. I guess I hadn’t realized the extent to which their brutality (and their ability to dehumanize almost anyone) was really their primary advantage, and was powerful enough to achieve a position of dominance.

The writing is perhaps not inspired, but is even and clear; neither dry nor decorative. DuVal does a good job letting the material itself do the work. You don’t feel her trying to dramatize things, which is fitting for a story already full of its own drama. She handles scale beautifully, moving between sweeping historical synthesis and close portraits of individuals (Tecumseh, e.g., or Major Ridge & John Ross) whose stories well epitomize the larger historical currents she's tracing.

DuVal presents a history of endurance, punctuated by loss (rather than the typical telling, with those two flipped). The narrative is obviously divided by eras—there are real watershed moments, through which continuity isn’t really possible. But even across those ruptures, you get a sense of Native nations’ persistence. It’s impossible not to feel anger at the history of European disregard and brutality, of course. But I also come away with a kind of reluctant hope in the way that Indigenous nations continue to prevail, adapt and assert themselves.

I can’t overstate how much I appreciated the (unfortunately) unconventional viewpoint of this book, and the illumination it provides. I’m inclined to read more of her work, just in the hope of finding that again. show less

I think it probable that I know significantly more than the average Anglo-American about the native peoples of what today is the US, southern Canada and northern Mexico. That's not saying much. Because, as much as I do know, I actually know next to nothing. I did know enough that the concept of a Noble Savage was hoakum to me. The concept of tribes as constantly warring and ignorant was only an Anglo excuse for committing genocide. And I knew the attacks on settlers by tribes were because show more the settlers were encroaching where they weren't supposed to be in the first place. The tribes were protecting their land. And I was keenly aware that it was intentional, malicious genocide on the part, not of just the settlers nor just the government, but of both. And it was a real and major effort to totally cancel the culture of native peoples. Anglo conservatives, stop whining. You are not experiencing Cancel Culture. You are experiencing merely minor discomfort. The indigineous peoples of the Americas experience Cancel Culture. Even today.

I learned so much from this book but still I know so little. What is most important, I understand some of today's challenges much better (still not a lot, but much better). I did not know the base for our Democracy was not from the Greek tradition as we were taught in school, but from the Northeastern Five Tribes Haudenosaunee Confederacy. I knew that as Iriquois and had never heard their name for themselves, but I digress. I did not know that irrigation was not brought to the western US by Mormons who got it from Egyptian history but that irrigation was practiced by the people already there for hundred of years before any European set foot in that region.

What I gained the most from was the discussion of the intertwinings of the relationship between the multitude of tribes and the US Government throught the Constitution, treaties and court decisions. What an incredibly immense and complex matrix! show less

In a splendid piece of historiography, DuVal reframes and refocuses the classically taught Eurocentric / Americentric tale of the North American "conquest" as a nuanced centuries long evolution of power. She frames each chapter around a single narrative to highlight an aspect of the erasure of indigenous people's power, diversity, and autonomy. It makes for a light and literary jaunt through material that might grow cumbersome or confusing if presented in textbook chronology or more staid show more language. Although I could have done with the 'conclusion' summaries and recaps at the ends of each chapter.
A great piece of non-fiction that mixes drama, revelation, and deep research. show less

86. Native Nations: A Millennium in North America by Kathleen DuVal
reader: Carolina Hoyos
OPD: 2024
format: 21:30 audible audiobook (752 pages)
acquired: November 17 listened: Nov 18 – Dec 26
rating: 3
genre/style: History theme: random audio
locations: North America
about the author: An American history and professor at UNC. She was born in Fayetteville, AR in 1970.

hmm. There are two different things to review. One is that it's very informative in a really nice unique way. The other is the show more nature of the language, the way the author tries to reframe history through selective use of words, and sometimes idioms.

The main issue while listening was the language. This is a work of historical correction that is trying to change the reader's perspective of the Native American position historically and currently. That's ok in theory, I think. But she's not really presenting any new information. So, there is weight on the agenda, and the history is managed, that is manipulated, to match that agenda. The main problem for me was the way the language was chosen. Can we reshape history through language? Of course. But is it meaningful? It doesn't change the history. Also, it's a forced thing, which means it's no better, no more sound, than all the other histories it's trying to correct. It's just dancing on the high end of an unbalanced seesaw. I feel pretty strongly that the way to correct history is to tell as it actually is (or actually is perceived), and in the most natural appropriate language; to look at historical players from as real a position as you can, as you're capable of. And an historian should press themselves to see and present different perspectives. That's, for me, the correction. Reframing history to through words, sometimes technically meaningless idioms, is information management.

What DuVal actively tries to do is balance native and colonial cultures by showing the sophistication of native culture (good), and by downplaying the sophistication of European explorers (bad). She spends a lot of time in the era where European colonial existence was fragile, based on supplies from little boats traveling across the Atlantic Ocean. The natives were in a position of strength. That's important for history. But deciding the ones from the boats are from an inferior culture is pressing things. As for the idioms, she will say that the Europeans were "exactly wrong", or that the natives 'were not the least bit interested". You can't argue with that, since technically it doesn't mean anything. And in actuality just means roughly "I hate stupid colonialism", or something equivalent.

The good aspect is the long view of native history, and the response of native tribes to their changing realities as Europeans arrived and began to settle, and the population began to explode. Natives were happy with some towns of exposed European settlers bringing technology and metals and guns that they didn't have other access to. But native populations were stabilized. When there were 100,000 Indians* east of the Mississippi and a few thousand settlers, it was one world. But when there 100,000 native tribe members and a million in a newly independent American nation, there was a big problem. Duval gives dignity to the continental retreat, showing the various situations of different tribes and their many different ways of managing their pressures. Cherokees developed their own alphabet and wrote up their own government and constitution. But still lost their land. Lumbee's in North Carolina purchased their land privately. There was no legal mechanism to remove them. So, they are still there. She doesn't go that deep into the Lumbees, but elsewhere notes that to maintain their land within private ownership meant the land could easily get picked up piece by piece as various families came in need. This is a problem in later developments. She also covers the Iriquois tribes, the plains tribes (mainly through the Kiowa and some on the Osage), and the New Mexico tribes who treated different regional Spanish centers as different nations, effectively. (Some tribes would capture inhabitants from one Spanish outpost and sell them as slaves in another Spanish settlement.) The farther west a tribe was in, say 1800, the more time they had to hold off European control. The Kiowas and Comanches, once they developed their treaties, ruled the southwest plains a long time. This is all good stuff. Fascinating.

Along the tragic elements and the continual loss of native land to American settlers and American natural resource hounds, was one that struck me. Native Americans were put on reservations owned communally. Enlightened, if ill-informed, white Americans wanted to Americanize the natives by making them full citizens and getting them involved in the national economy. This is around 1900, the melting pot era. The result, although resisted, caused native tribes to lose over half the land on the reservations.

I gained a lot from this book. But I struggled with what she was doing with the language. I'm not sure if it's a political leaning on my part, but I can't come to any peace with that aspect. It's plainly manipulative to me, and confusing. I'm not against rethinking history. But I want to facts to do the talking, not the author's choice of language. So, sadly, I can't recommend this one without that caution.

*She uses the word Indian a lot and seems to suggest it's a word of pride.

2024
https://www.librarything.com/topic/365030#8712434 show less