One of the major destructive forces to American Indian peoples were the assimilation-based policies that destroyed traditional kinship systems and family units. This destruction contributed to the cycle of dysfunction that continues to plague families and homes in Indian country. A second major destructive blow occurred when colonial forces, through law and policy, reinforced white male patriarchal kinship and family systems. In this colonial system, American Indian concepts, roles, and responsibilities associated with fatherhood and motherhood were devalued and Indian children grew up with a dysfunctional sense of family and kinship. This article examines the traditional kinship system of the Cheyenne Indians, highlighting the importance of kinship terms, roles, and responsibilities. The traditional Cheyenne kinship system emphasized familial relationships for the sake of childrearing and imparting traditional values of respect, reciprocity, and balance. Traditional principles of heške'estovestôtse (motherhood), héhe'estovestôtse (fatherhood), and méhósánestôtse (love) were the backbone of the Cheyenne family.
In this article, I discuss how indigenous understandings of time can contribute to broader studies of human societies, civilizations, and world history. Colonial paradigms have extended into the realm of world history and assumptions of human behavior have been unfairly applied to all human societies and labeled humans as aggressors against nature and each other. This is unjust especially to the populations that remain victims of colonialism and imperialism. I have developed or, put more appropriately, revealed an indigenous historical paradigm that can be applied to the study of human societies, but my primary goal is to provide a model that links indigenous histories in comparative studies of humans and human societies. To provide an adequate discussion of this model, I use examples from two indigenous societies (Maya and Hopi) to develop my thesis, and two other indigenous societies (Haudenosaunee and Cheyenne) for evaluation under this thesis. I conclude with a final discussion of Christian societies and their place in an indigenous view of world history.
In this article, I discuss how indigenous understandings of time can contribute to broader studies of human societies, civilizations, and world history. Colonial paradigms have extended into the realm of world history and assumptions of human behavior have been unfairly applied to all human societies and labeled humans as aggressors against nature and each other. This is unjust especially to the populations that remain victims of colonialism and imperialism. I have developed or, put more appropriately, revealed an indigenous historical paradigm that can be applied to the study of human societies, but my primary goal is to provide a model that links indigenous histories in comparative studies of humans and human societies. To provide an adequate discussion of this model, I use examples from two indigenous societies (Maya and Hopi) to develop my thesis, and two other indigenous societies (Haudenosaunee and Cheyenne) for evaluation under this thesis. I conclude with a final discussion of Christian societies and their place in an indigenous view of world history.
Federal Indian law (FIL), also known as American Indian law, is the body of doctrine that regulates the political relationship between American Indian and Alaska Native governments and the federal government. FIL is best understood as the development of this “government-to-government” relationship, which intersects with other bodies of law like constitutional law, criminal law, and environmental law. FIL is comprised of legal doctrines, statutes, judicial decisions, treaties, and executive orders, all of which have direct influences on the rights and sovereignty of Indian tribes. In the United States there are 573 federally recognized tribes that are subject to the rights and privileges, as well as the consequences, of FIL. These federally recognized tribes are the third sovereign authority in the United States—the other two are states and the federal government—that retain inherent rights and that exercise and enjoy sovereignty and self-governance on their own lands. The historical development of FIL in the United States constitutes an important starting point in understanding the special relationship between Indian tribes and the federal government. The origins of FIL lay in three US Supreme Court cases known as the “Marshall trilogy,” after Chief Justice John Marshall, the presiding chief justice of Johnson v. McIntosh (1823), Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (1831), and Worcester v. Georgia (1832). At that time, the primary questions centered on the sovereign rights of Indian tribes, that is, whether Indians have dominion over themselves and their lands. Throughout the development of FIL, until today, questions of Indian tribal sovereignty—or Indigenous nation sovereignty—remained contentious as Indians continued to fight for treaty rights, autonomy, and self-determination. FIL can be described as a series of wins and losses for American Indians in their fight for sovereign rights. In the end, however, the study of FIL is equally the study of how the United States was able to legally subjugate America’s indigenous peoples and acquire their lands. FIL is basically the study of America’s justification for Native America’s colonization and the genocide perpetrated against American Indians. The literature on FIL or American Indian law is vast, but the most valuable resources are authored by and for attorneys and for students of law. Although the disciplines of Native American and Indigenous studies encompass facets of American Indian and Indigenous peoples’ lives, scholarship in FIL has proven to be beneficial. The resources cited in this article represent some of the widely used texts that provide a solid foundation for studies in FIL.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.