Robert Remini’s Andrew Jackson and His Indian Wars is a book that makes you question Jackson's character. Remini addresses the long-standing debate of historians and scholars over whether or not Jackson was barbaric or whether he was a merciful savior that prevented the Native Americans from going extinct. Remini instead argues the opinion that Jackson was simply a man of his time. Despite this, Remini does show Jackson's inexcusable cruelty towards the Native Americans. He learned to fear and hate Indians from an early age. Jackson conducted a successful campaign that broke the back of the Creeks in 1813 and 1814, earning the nickname “Sharp Knife” from his Indian foes. When Jackson uprooted Native Americans west of the Mississippi River, …show more content…
"He always addressed Indians as though they were children, irrespective of their age, education, or intellectual maturity." When negotiating, Jackson would often use bribery or the threat of violence if his demands were rejected. It’s this kind of cruelty that makes people think of him as a relentless enemy of Indians. Remini follows Jackson into Tennessee where he develops into "a bold and resourceful Indian fighter, thirsting for encounters with savages.” Throughout the book we discover the life of a young man who "learned to fear and hate Indians from an early age," Jackson always remembered his childhood. When the Native Americans joined with the British to wage war against the Americans it was clear that "In his mind, and the minds of most frontiersman, the Indians were just used by powers like Britian to gain an advantage over the American colonists. Remini thinks Jackson is at fault for his desire to speed up the process of moving Natives. "He lacked patience, and by his pressure to move things along quickly he caused unspeakable cruelties to innocent people who deserved better from a nation that prided itself on its commitment to justice and equality." “So thousands of men, women, and children suffered not only the loss of their property but physical agony and even …show more content…
Remini displays a different message. He says “To his dying day on June 8, 1845, Andrew Jackson genuinely believed that what he had accomplished rescued these people from inevitable annihilation. And although that statement sounds monstrous, and although no one in the modern world wishes to accept or believe it, that is exactly what he did. He saved the Five Civilized Nations from probable extinction.” This is a complete turnaround from what he said he was not going to do at the start of the
Even though Jackson was saved by a Cherokee native, he would not return the favor. " Chief John Ross sent Junaluska as an envoy to plead with President Jackson for protection for his people, but Jackson's manner was cold and indifferent towards the rugged son of the forest who had saved his life. " Junaluska was sent to beseeched President Jacksons to not push forward with the Indian Removal Act. Jackson wasn’t very magnanimity with the natives by pushing them off their ancestral land just so the U.S. can
Jackson took on a new persona, he still embodied the West but was stained by his ruthless takeover of Indian Land and the forced relocation of Indians. It is evident there are many different perspectives on
Throughout time Andrew Jackson is portrayed in different ways. When first elected in 1824 many felt that he won the title unjustly. There was a controversy of a “corrupt bargain”. At the start of the nineteenth century historians “damned Jackson as a backwoods bargain” and believed Jacksonians was “an irresponsible, ill-bred outburst”. As time went on many viewed Jackson as a hero and leader.
General Andrew jackson chased away some of the native indians and took spanish forts and people who have escaped and hid in a place to not get thrown back to jail. Later on all of the americans liked the action that he took and so he received approval from the politicians. John Quincy on the other hand, demanded that spain control the person or animal that lives in florida or give it up. In the paragraph the author states that “General Andrew Jackson chased some fleeing Native Indians over the boundary.”
Jackson faced the issue of Indian removal throughout his eight year in office. He made about 70 treaties with Native American tribes both in South and the Northwest. Jackson presidency marked as a new era in Indian-Anglo American relations imitating a policy if Indian removal. His annual message of December of 1829 contained extensive remarks on the present and future state of American Indians in the United States. It contained many observations, assessments, and prejudices about Native Americans that had been widely held by Native American hunters makers since Thomas Jefferson’s presidency.
On one hand there’s Wallace’s work, which condemns the president, calling him cowardly and weak. While Remini’s work says the complete opposite, describing Jackson as a man of the people who did what nobody else would. The authors use lots of primary sources including the address to congress. Wallace writes about how during the address Jackson does not seem interested in personifying the natives. They also use historical events, such as the trail of tears to further their points.
Jackson believed the Native Americans were “barbarians” (Tindall and Shi 429). The Jacksonian Democrats stood for equality, yet they thought they were better than the Creeks, Choctaws, Cherokees, and other Indian tribes. The Indians were manipulated with bribery and alcohol (Tindall and Shi 429). This deceit lead to some tribes resisting, but these rebellions were soon quelled. Many Native Americans, especially the Cherokee, died because of the Jacksonian government’s view on different people groups and their callous and manipulative actions.
Andrew Jackson was the seventeenth president of the United States. He was known as a hero because of how he fought in the War of 1812. Jackson was known for taking apart the National Bank and making pet banks. This seemed like a good idea to Jackson, however, this eventually led to the Panic of 1837. Despite that, he was known for being for the common man.
However, the final nail in the coffin in Jackson’s case for innocence was his treatment of the Native Americans. Jackson said that his priority would be to get the Natives off of their land, and he did so in an extremely gruesome way: after allowing white settlers to encroach onto natives’ land, with the Indian Removal Act, Jackson outright refused to enforce a Supreme Court decision, and forced the Natives to take a snow-ridden several-hundred-mile trek towards the West, without anything but what they could carry on them. In fact, the actions committed by Jackson’s government were so atrocious that they have been compared to the Holocaust by several
The Indian Removal Act authorized Jackson to give the Indians land west of the Mississippi in exchange for their land in the states, but could not force them to leave. He violated and broke commitments that he even negotiated with them. He tried to bribe the Indians and even threatened some of them. Alfred Cave organizes his article thematically and is trying to prove
His government and a chief of an Indian tribe called the “Cherokee” signed the Treaty of New Echota in 1835, stating that all of the Cherokee lands now belonged to the United States for $5.6 million dollars. Many of the Indians did not want to leave, so resisted the treaty and stayed in what was once their land. Then, his government forced all of them out of their homes without time to gather belongings. This resulted in four thousand deaths of the Cherokee Indians due to starvation, freezing temperature, and disease (Alchin 1). Although some might say that Andrew Jackson built the United States and should not be labeled by what he did wrong, referred to violence and quarreling when something went wrong which resulted in cutting off many valuable lives.
He believed Jackson needed a reality check. The Indians were there first, it was their land. He force the Natives to move away from their homeland, with brute force. He believes Jackson could not justify his actions just because it was for America’s benefit. He also stated Jackson refused to listen to many people, and he refused to let Indians live.
Andrew Jackson’s sentiment towards the Native Americans was certainly not a kind one. Manifest destiny was a popular belief among Americans, including Jackson, and he would go to the extent of forcing Native Americans out of their homes to reach their “ordained goal”. He believed in the expansion of southern slavery which is why he pushed for removing the Indians west of the Mississippi, which makes it the more disgraceful. The Indian Removal Act of 1830 said that it will allow American government to offer in-state territories to the Indian’s for their western land. This wasn’t the case when the U.S. went in and drove the Indians out by force.
Andrew Jackson has been remembered as a ground breaking president, even being put on the $20. President Jackson was a controversial figure, doing many popular and unpopular things in his time. Although he is remembered as a hero from the war of 1812, he also caused the Trail of Tears and tried to destroy the National Bank. As a result, Jackson should not be put on the $20 bill. His actions have caused many misfortune showing that villains do exist.
Andrew Jackson disobeyed a direct order from the Supreme Court, which it means he was above the law. I really wonder how Americans tolerated him, at that time, he was cruel to the Indian common man. Because of him, the Native Americans have the worst end of the Trail of Tears. They are the ones who are forced out of their traditional homes and sent away on a journey of pain and death. Those who had fallen ill, most of the time died, and those who had the will to move on were able to make it to the end and start new lives.