Reading Territory: Indigenous and Black Freedom, Removal, and the Nineteenth-Century State by Kathryn Walkiewicz (review)

Pub Date : 2024-04-22 DOI:10.1353/soh.2024.a925464
Deborah A. Rosen
{"title":"Reading Territory: Indigenous and Black Freedom, Removal, and the Nineteenth-Century State by Kathryn Walkiewicz (review)","authors":"Deborah A. Rosen","doi":"10.1353/soh.2024.a925464","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<span><span>In lieu of</span> an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:</span>\n<p> <span>Reviewed by:</span> <ul> <li><!-- html_title --> <em>Reading Territory: Indigenous and Black Freedom, Removal, and the Nineteenth-Century State</em> by Kathryn Walkiewicz <!-- /html_title --></li> <li> Deborah A. Rosen </li> </ul> <em>Reading Territory: Indigenous and Black Freedom, Removal, and the Nineteenth-Century State</em>. By Kathryn Walkiewicz. (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2023. Pp. xx, 293. Paper, $32.95, ISBN 978-1-4696-7295-3; cloth, $99.00, ISBN 978-1-4696-7294-6.) <p><em>Reading Territory: Indigenous and Black Freedom, Removal, and the Nineteenth-Century State</em> examines the relationship between colonization, enslavement, and state-making in the nineteenth-century United States. In this carefully researched and clearly presented study, Kathryn Walkiewicz argues that Indigenous dispossession, anti-Blackness, and white supremacy were central to the formation and identity of U.S. states; that states’-rights discourse was used to reinforce white men’s rights and their control over land; and that statehood itself was (and is) incompatible with Indigenous and Black <strong>[End Page 430]</strong> freedom. The author analyzes how white Americans used printed texts and visual images to imagine exclusionary states into being, and also how Indigenous, Black, and Afro-Native people used their own print culture to contest the entire settler-colonial project and advocate for their own freedom and self-determination.</p> <p>After an introduction that lays out the themes of the book, four substantive chapters analyze debates about Black and Native freedom in Georgia (1830s), Florida (1820s–1840s), Kansas and Cuba (1850s), and Indian Territory (1890s–1900s). In keeping with the title <em>Reading Territory</em>, the book concentrates more on colonization than on enslavement, and it analyzes more extensively Native-produced texts than Black-authored ones. Chapters 1 and 2 draw from various short primary sources to illustrate the ideological role of print culture in both justifying and opposing state control, subjugation, and the removal of Indigenous people. By the 1850s, longer published texts provided fuller contemporary counternarratives to the dominant stories justifying state-hood, and <em>Reading Territory</em> is most intriguing when it delves deeply into those singular printed works. This is especially evident in chapter 3, which focuses mostly on how Kansas statehood was framed in the 1850s as a way of promoting Black people’s liberation and freedom, while Natives’ forced removal was erased. The chapter provides insightful, thought-provoking analysis of Martin R. Delany’s serialized novel <em>Blake</em> (1859–1862), John Brougham’s play <em>Columbus el Filibustero!</em> (1857), and published maps of Kansas Territory. Likewise, chapter 4 on Indian Territory—which describes Indigenous and Black residents’ unsuccessful efforts to establish their own states prior to the ultimate admission of Oklahoma as a state in 1907—offers deep studies of works pertaining to the 1905 State of Sequoyah movement, such as a single 1902 issue of the Muscogee-run <em>Indian Journal</em> and poems and essays by Too-Qua-Stee. The conclusion considers ways in which Indian Territory and the city of Tulsa have been envisioned in twenty-first-century Supreme Court decisions and popular television shows.</p> <p>Because Walkiewicz focuses on southern case studies and on state-oriented printed material, it is important to keep two things in mind. First, at times northern states used states’-rights arguments to defend Black citizenship and rights—for example, in response to the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 and the <em>Dred Scott v. Sandford</em> case (1857). Most scholars similarly downplay antebellum northerners’ states’-rights rhetoric, which complicates the standard narrative about sectionalism and federalism. Second, the federal government shared with the states an interest in slavery, Indigenous dispossession, and white supremacy, and, as is evident in constitutional and legal history scholarship, racialized definitions of membership and rights played a significant role in the construction of the United States as a nation-state, just as it did in the creation of individual federated states.</p> <p>Nonetheless, Walkiewicz demonstrates the value of going beyond constitutional and legal approaches, using literary texts and visual images to study state formation, and focusing on southern states that had a distinct history of Indigenous and Black people. <em>Reading Territory</em> makes important contributions by intertwining Black, Indigenous, Afro-Native, and white perspectives; by making a convincing argument about the significant role of state-centered <strong>[End Page 431]</strong> discourse; and by persuasively showing that print culture was an important vehicle for...</p> </p>","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/soh.2024.a925464","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Reviewed by:

  • Reading Territory: Indigenous and Black Freedom, Removal, and the Nineteenth-Century State by Kathryn Walkiewicz
  • Deborah A. Rosen
Reading Territory: Indigenous and Black Freedom, Removal, and the Nineteenth-Century State. By Kathryn Walkiewicz. (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2023. Pp. xx, 293. Paper, $32.95, ISBN 978-1-4696-7295-3; cloth, $99.00, ISBN 978-1-4696-7294-6.)

Reading Territory: Indigenous and Black Freedom, Removal, and the Nineteenth-Century State examines the relationship between colonization, enslavement, and state-making in the nineteenth-century United States. In this carefully researched and clearly presented study, Kathryn Walkiewicz argues that Indigenous dispossession, anti-Blackness, and white supremacy were central to the formation and identity of U.S. states; that states’-rights discourse was used to reinforce white men’s rights and their control over land; and that statehood itself was (and is) incompatible with Indigenous and Black [End Page 430] freedom. The author analyzes how white Americans used printed texts and visual images to imagine exclusionary states into being, and also how Indigenous, Black, and Afro-Native people used their own print culture to contest the entire settler-colonial project and advocate for their own freedom and self-determination.

After an introduction that lays out the themes of the book, four substantive chapters analyze debates about Black and Native freedom in Georgia (1830s), Florida (1820s–1840s), Kansas and Cuba (1850s), and Indian Territory (1890s–1900s). In keeping with the title Reading Territory, the book concentrates more on colonization than on enslavement, and it analyzes more extensively Native-produced texts than Black-authored ones. Chapters 1 and 2 draw from various short primary sources to illustrate the ideological role of print culture in both justifying and opposing state control, subjugation, and the removal of Indigenous people. By the 1850s, longer published texts provided fuller contemporary counternarratives to the dominant stories justifying state-hood, and Reading Territory is most intriguing when it delves deeply into those singular printed works. This is especially evident in chapter 3, which focuses mostly on how Kansas statehood was framed in the 1850s as a way of promoting Black people’s liberation and freedom, while Natives’ forced removal was erased. The chapter provides insightful, thought-provoking analysis of Martin R. Delany’s serialized novel Blake (1859–1862), John Brougham’s play Columbus el Filibustero! (1857), and published maps of Kansas Territory. Likewise, chapter 4 on Indian Territory—which describes Indigenous and Black residents’ unsuccessful efforts to establish their own states prior to the ultimate admission of Oklahoma as a state in 1907—offers deep studies of works pertaining to the 1905 State of Sequoyah movement, such as a single 1902 issue of the Muscogee-run Indian Journal and poems and essays by Too-Qua-Stee. The conclusion considers ways in which Indian Territory and the city of Tulsa have been envisioned in twenty-first-century Supreme Court decisions and popular television shows.

Because Walkiewicz focuses on southern case studies and on state-oriented printed material, it is important to keep two things in mind. First, at times northern states used states’-rights arguments to defend Black citizenship and rights—for example, in response to the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 and the Dred Scott v. Sandford case (1857). Most scholars similarly downplay antebellum northerners’ states’-rights rhetoric, which complicates the standard narrative about sectionalism and federalism. Second, the federal government shared with the states an interest in slavery, Indigenous dispossession, and white supremacy, and, as is evident in constitutional and legal history scholarship, racialized definitions of membership and rights played a significant role in the construction of the United States as a nation-state, just as it did in the creation of individual federated states.

Nonetheless, Walkiewicz demonstrates the value of going beyond constitutional and legal approaches, using literary texts and visual images to study state formation, and focusing on southern states that had a distinct history of Indigenous and Black people. Reading Territory makes important contributions by intertwining Black, Indigenous, Afro-Native, and white perspectives; by making a convincing argument about the significant role of state-centered [End Page 431] discourse; and by persuasively showing that print culture was an important vehicle for...

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
阅读领土:土著和黑人的自由、迁移和十九世纪的国家》,作者 Kathryn Walkiewicz(评论)
以下是内容的简要摘录,以代替摘要:评论者: 阅读领地:Kathryn Walkiewicz Deborah A. Rosen 著,Reading Territory: Indigenous and Black Freedom, Removal, and the Nineteenth-Century State:土著和黑人的自由、迁移与十九世纪的国家。作者:Kathryn Walkiewicz。(教堂山:北卡罗来纳大学出版社,2023 年。Pp.纸质版,32.95 美元,ISBN 978-1-4696-7295-3;布质版,99.00 美元,ISBN 978-1-4696-7294-6)。Reading Territory:阅读领土:土著和黑人的自由、迁移与 19 世纪的国家》研究了 19 世纪美国的殖民化、奴役和国家建设之间的关系。凯瑟琳-沃克维茨(Kathryn Walkiewicz)在这本经过仔细研究、表述清晰的研究报告中指出,土著剥夺、反黑人和白人至上对美国各州的形成和身份认同至关重要;州权话语被用来强化白人的权利及其对土地的控制;州地位本身过去(现在)与土著和黑人 [第430页完] 的自由不相容。作者分析了美国白人如何利用印刷文本和视觉图像来想象排斥性国家的存在,以及土著人、黑人和非洲裔原住民如何利用他们自己的印刷文化来质疑整个殖民定居项目,并倡导他们自己的自由和自决。导言阐述了本书的主题,随后四个实质性章节分析了乔治亚州(19 世纪 30 年代)、佛罗里达州(19 世纪 20 年代至 18 世纪 40 年代)、堪萨斯州和古巴(19 世纪 50 年代)以及印第安人领地(19 世纪 90 年代至 20 世纪)有关黑人和原住民自由的辩论。与《阅读领地》这一书名相一致,本书更多地关注殖民化而非奴役,对土著人创作的文本的分析也比对黑人创作的文本的分析更为广泛。第 1 章和第 2 章利用各种简短的原始资料来说明印刷文化在为国家控制、征服和驱逐土著居民的行为进行辩护和反对的过程中所扮演的意识形态角色。到了 19 世纪 50 年代,出版的长篇文本提供了更全面的当代反叙事,以驳斥为国家地位辩护的主流故事,而《阅读领地》在深入研究这些独特的印刷作品时最引人入胜。这一点在第 3 章中尤为明显,该章主要关注 19 世纪 50 年代堪萨斯州的建州是如何被塑造成一种促进黑人解放和自由的方式,而原住民的强制迁移则被抹杀。该章对马丁-R-德兰尼(Martin R. Delany)的连载小说《布莱克》(1859-1862 年)、约翰-布鲁厄姆(John Brougham)的剧本《哥伦布-费里布斯特罗》(Columbus el Filibustero!(1857)以及已出版的堪萨斯地区地图。同样,关于印第安人领地的第 4 章描述了土著居民和黑人居民在 1907 年俄克拉荷马州最终被接纳为州之前为建立自己的州所做的不成功努力,该章深入研究了与 1905 年 Sequoyah 州运动有关的作品,如穆斯科吉人经营的《印第安人杂志》的 1902 年单期以及 Too-Qua-Stee 的诗歌和散文。结论部分探讨了二十一世纪最高法院判决和流行电视节目中对印第安领地和塔尔萨市的设想。由于 Walkiewicz 主要关注南方案例研究和以州为导向的印刷材料,因此必须牢记两点。首先,北方各州有时会使用州权论据来捍卫黑人的公民身份和权利--例如,针对 1850 年《逃奴法案》和 Dred Scott 诉 Sandford 案(1857 年)。大多数学者同样淡化了前贝卢姆时期北方人的州权论,这使得有关科层制和联邦制的标准论述变得复杂。其次,联邦政府与各州在奴隶制、土著剥夺和白人至上等问题上存在共同利益,正如宪法和法律史学术研究中显而易见的那样,种族化的成员资格和权利定义在美国作为一个民族国家的构建过程中发挥了重要作用,正如它在创建各个联邦州的过程中所发挥的作用一样。然而,Walkiewicz 展示了超越宪法和法律研究方法的价值,他利用文学文本和视觉图像来研究州的形成,并将重点放在有独特土著和黑人历史的南部各州。阅读领土》将黑人、土著人、非洲裔土著人和白人的观点交织在一起,就以州为中心的话语的重要作用提出了令人信服的论据,并令人信服地表明印刷文化是........................
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1