Free Inquiry in Creative Sodofogy Volume 26 No. I, May /998 Page 71 WAGING THE CONTEST BETWEEN "SAVAGERY" AND "CIVILIZATION": AN EXAMINATION OF THE TENSION BETWEEN ACCULTURATION AND REMOVAL AT THE BRAZOS RESERVATION, 1855-1859 Kelly F. Himmel, University of Texas-Pan American ABSTRACT The developmentofthe reservation system between 1849 and the Civil War represents atransition in US Indian policy from removal to acculturation. This case study examines the two conflicting and basically incompatible underpinnings ofthe reservation system: removal (isolation)from the dominant group coupled with a program designed to acculturate Indians tothe norms and values ofthe dominant group. Despitethe efforts made by Indians on the Brazos Reservation in Texas to cooperate with the United States government's acculturation program, the reservation was destroyed by white settlers who refused to allow the Indians to live in their midst. The settlers destroyed the reservation even though itwas to theireconomic benefitto keep it open. Thus, the article increases our understanding ofthe poorly-known formative years of the reservation system as well as the contradictions inherent in an institution thatwasdesigned both to isolate aminority group and acculturate itto the norms and values ofthe majoritygroup. INTRODUCTION Takaki 1979). Previous studies of the Indian reservation However, the westward expansion of the system in the United States have most fre­ Angio-American frontier of settlement proved quently focused on the post-Civil War period to be much faster than expected, and the and its assimilation policy (Fritz 1963, Hoxie Native American response proved to be less 1984, Trennert 1988). However, the devel­ tractabie than expected. By the 1830s, forced opment of the reservation system between removal of American Indians east of the Mis­ 1849 and the Civil War remains poorly un­ sissippi became official policy. By the 1840s, derstood (Prucha 1984; Trennert 1975; Wishart the discourse of savagery versus civilization 1994). Yet, this period allows one to focus on began to result in the call for extermination or the tensions engendered by the transition from civilization for Indians by many Anglo-Ameri­ an Indian policy emphasizing removal to one cans (Horsman 1981), though the humanitar­ emphasizing acculturation and eventual as­ ian, reformist bent continued to structure offi­ similation. Exploring this tension between re­ ciai Indian policy in the United States (Prucha moval and acculturation during the formative 1981). As such, the Indian reservations in the years of the reservation period allows one to pre-Civil War United States, while rooted in a better understand the enigma posed by the genuine humanitarian concern for the welfare existence of the reservations-physical and ofAmerican Indians (Prucha 1981), also were social spaces in which American Indians were influenced by the greater discourse of the both separated from the dominant group and contest between savagery and civilization that encouraged to conform to the norms and the West used to frame its imperial expansion values of the dominant 9rouP. and conquest of non-Western people. In the first years of the nation, an intense Thus, this case study of the Brazos Res­ debate arose overthefateofthenew republic's ervation between 1855 and 1859 goes beyond American Indian inhabitants. The intellectual illuminating a relatively obscure aspect of and political elite of the United States realized American Indian-white relations. Rather, it that Indians held lands that the European uses historical data, from both secondary origin people ofthe United States needed and sources and primary sources, to focus on a would eventually claim. Although Indians ex­ neglected problem in American social sci­ isted in "savagery," the Enlightenment belief ence: the development of the Indian reser­ in the perfectibility of humankind led them to vation as a place where an ethnic minority hope that they could be "civilized" by their could be both isolated from the dominant contact with the European world. As a result, group and encouraged to emulate the norms they would disappear as Indians. Of course, and values of that group. The Brazos Res­ they could withdraw westward beyond the ervation is particularly well-suited for exami­ frontier ofEuropean settlement or die out from nation because it was, in the words of Francis disease and other natural causes as Anglo­ Paul Prucha (1984), "strikingly ineffective." American society and "civilization" approached (Berkhofer 1978; Prucha 1981; Sheehan 1973; 72 Volume 26 No. I, May 1998 Free InqUiry in Creative SOCiology THE CREATION OF THE BRAZOS with the United States, its citizens, and other RESERVATION Indians who live at peace with the United With the annexation of Texas in 1846, the States. In return, the American Indian nations American Indians in the new state became the were to receive additional "presents in responsibility of the United States govern­ goods... to the amount of $10,000" and the ment. In the twenty five years prior to the "benefits" of blacksmiths, school teachers. acquisition ofTexasthe diverse native peoples and "preachers of the gospel" who might be ofTexas (Newcomb 1961) had been caught in sent to them "at the discretion of the President a complex three-way conflict between Anglo­ ofthe United States" (Winfrey, Day 1966). The American settlers, Mexico, and the Comanches Indians of western Texas received no guar­ (Fehrenbach 1968; Reichstein 1989). In addi­ antees that would prevent settlers from taking tion, new Indian groups entered Texas from their lands. the United States during this period as a result After the conquest of Mexico in the War of ofthe westward expansion ofAnglo-American 1846-1848 secured United States control over settlement and Jackson's policy of Indian re­ Texas and the Southwest, federal policy aimed moval. By 1846, some groups present in 1821, to 1) prevent raids into Mexico as required by such as the Karankawas ofthe GulfCoast, had the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, 2) protect been virtually exterminated by Anglo-Ameri­ travelers and trade between Texas and Cali­ can settler violence (Gatschet 1891; Himmel fornia, and 3) secure the property of the set­ 1995). Others, such as the Bidais of east tlers (Trennert 1977). To achieve these goals, central Texas, survived as only a few scattered the United States established a chain of mili­ individuals after being decimated by diseases tary posts on the border with Mexico; another introduced by the settlers (Sjoberg 1951). The line of forts extended along the frontier of non-agricultural Tonkawas and Lipans sought settlement. In addition, the military located refuge along the southwestern frontier ofAnglo­ other forts beyond the frontier of settlement to American settlement (Himmel 1995; Schilz protect travelers and traders on the two main 1987; Sjoberg 1953a, 1953b). Remnants of routes to California. the Caddo, Hasinai, and Wichita confedera­ By 1850, increased travel across the south­ cies (Caddos, Anadarkos, lonis, Keechis, ern plains, a growing demand for meat and Tawakonis, and WaeDs) retreated to the west­ hides, and introduced bovine diseases had ern edge of Anglo-American settlement in begun to severely impact the bison herds north Texas. There, they attempted to rebuild (Flores 1991). The decline in the game coin­ their agricultural and trading economies cided with an increased demand forcaptives in (Newkumet, Meredith 1988; Smith 1995). In New Mexico and for horses throughout the east Texas, only the small immigrant Ala­ southern plains. This led to an increase in bama-Coushatta tribe remained after Repub­ raiding activities in MeXico, Texas, and the lie ofTexas President Lamar's wars directed at Southwest by Apaches, Comanches and their immigrant Indians in 1839 (Rothe 1963). Far­ allies, and newcomers from the east (Hall ther west, well beyond the line of settlement, 1989). Mixed ethnicity outlaw gan9s that had the Comanches maintained considerable earlier been found largely between the Nueces power. However, the southern "division" ofthe and the Rio Grande spread westward (Olmsted Comanches, the Penatekas, who occupied 1978). central Texas, had come under considerable The push of settlement forced the Caddos, pressure from Anglo-American settlers (Fos­ Hasinais (Anadarkos and lonis), Keechis, ter 1991; Schilz, Schilz 1989). Lipans, Penateka Comanches, Tonkawas, and Initially, the United States concluded a Wichitas \'Nacos and Tawakonis) farther and treaty at the Council Springs, near present-day farther west. For the agriculturists, it became Waco, on 15 May 1846, with representatives impossible to remain in one place long enough of the Anadarkos, Caddos, lonis, Keechis, to raise a crop, and starvation stalked the Lipans, Penateka Comanches, Tawakonis, children and the aged (Neighbours 1973), and, Tonkawas, Wacos, and Wichitas. By the terms in Texas, dryland farming, as practiced by the of the treaty, the Indians placed themselves Caddos, Hasinais, and Wichitas, becomes under the protection of the United States and increasingly risky \'Nebb 1936). For ali, un­ promised to trade only with traders licensed by familiar hunting territories; competition with the United States; to give up prisoners, crimi­ outlaws, settlers, soldiers, and travelers forthe nals, and stolen property; and to live in peace declining game; and exposure to violence and Free Inquiry in Creative Sociology Volume 26 No. I, May 1998 Page 73 disease shattered traditional cultures. The remains but to wage war with all our might and entire area from well below the Rio Grande to carry it into the wigwams and villages of our the Arkansas River, along and west of the line barbarous foe." Yet. more moderate voices of settlement, became a haven for lawless­ presented the state and the federal govern­ ness centered around the stealing of captives ments with a choice. Former Provisional Presi­ and horses (Neighbours 1973). dent ofthe Republic olTexas, David G. Burnet The creation of a coherent and workable (1849), who had lived among the Comanches Indian policy in Texas faced additional road­ as a young man, wrote to Neighbors on 20 blocks. The state owned the public lands and August 1847.