Gary C. Anderson wrote the biography Sitting Bull and the Paradox of Lakota Nationhood in an effort to tell the story, from Sitting Bull’s perspective, of how the Lakota nationhood were committed to defend their land as well as examine the goals and purposes of the American culture to dominate upon them. Despite the factionalisms, encouraged by the federal government, in the Lakota that led to the division of the nationhood, Sitting Bull is considered one of the most significant and influential Native Americans in history because he would always look out for the best interest of the Sioux tribe and the Lakota nation by standing up against the American army who was interested in the relocation of Indians and the creation of reservations.
It …show more content…
At first, the Sioux fought for their territory and were not willing to allow the Americans to stay but everything changed after they developed factions that caused major Indian divisions. Some Sioux believed that if they fought against the federal government, they would be outnumbered and lose everything they owned, while others, including Sitting Bull, were against the federal government and its army and believed they should fight against them. Anderson explains it better when he writes: “the more Sitting Bull and his followers sought to unify and define Lakota nationhood, and the more it seemed so distinctly different from what the Americans had to offer, the more the Lakota leadership faced factionalism and decay” (pg. …show more content…
Therefore, the government created The Fort Laramie Treaty that would limit the white settlers from entering those areas, but failed to follow it through. Because of the fights the Sioux were causing, the government created a “Great Sioux” reservation and suggested the Indians to relocate to this camp. After their attempt to purchase the Black Hills from the Indians, they mandated all Lakota to settle on the reservation by January 31, 1876. Many Indians lost their homes and food rations in the winter that they surrendered to the troops and went to the reservations. Sitting Bull and his tribe refused to be part of the reservations and be forced to leave their customs that they decided they would rather
It …show more content…
At first, the Sioux fought for their territory and were not willing to allow the Americans to stay but everything changed after they developed factions that caused major Indian divisions. Some Sioux believed that if they fought against the federal government, they would be outnumbered and lose everything they owned, while others, including Sitting Bull, were against the federal government and its army and believed they should fight against them. Anderson explains it better when he writes: “the more Sitting Bull and his followers sought to unify and define Lakota nationhood, and the more it seemed so distinctly different from what the Americans had to offer, the more the Lakota leadership faced factionalism and decay” (pg. …show more content…
Therefore, the government created The Fort Laramie Treaty that would limit the white settlers from entering those areas, but failed to follow it through. Because of the fights the Sioux were causing, the government created a “Great Sioux” reservation and suggested the Indians to relocate to this camp. After their attempt to purchase the Black Hills from the Indians, they mandated all Lakota to settle on the reservation by January 31, 1876. Many Indians lost their homes and food rations in the winter that they surrendered to the troops and went to the reservations. Sitting Bull and his tribe refused to be part of the reservations and be forced to leave their customs that they decided they would rather