Explaining My Paper

I did my research paper on how  indigenous women who married European fur traders were viewed by their own people as well as their husbands and white society in the early 1800’s.

While I was doing my research paper I chose my sources with the intent on gaining multiple points of view from both genders and races. My primary source, Harmon’s Journal goes more into the husband’s perspective. As for my secondary sources “The woman who married a beaver”, offers an in depth look at all four of these with added information on their gender roles, while “The Blue Flower” focuses on the societal and family viewpoint and “Women, kin, and Catholicism” focuses on the indigenous and female perspective.

The purpose of this was to answer some questions I had on Harmon’s Journal (as seen in the paper below), as I was curious on whether or not Harmon’s plan of marrying a young indigenous girl and then passing her off to another fur trader were truly for the girl’s own good, as he claimed. I realized early on that in order to answer these questions I would have to look at these relationships from every viewpoint and not just the European fur traders’.

For example, the ideology of gender roles held by the Europeans made their view of women to be that of domestic home makers, thereby obscuring their view of native women, often causing them to dismiss their contributions to the trade effort and society as a whole[28]. This is an excerpt from one of my sources, an article by Bruce M. White called “The woman who married a beaver”, explaining how a dominating ideology held by group of people that write the most historical documentations can alter our perceptions of the former. I myself expected the indigenous wives to be more submissive towards their white husbands until my research proved me wrong.

 

My Paper

The Bride’s Best Bet: An Analysis of Harmon’s Journal Concerning His Potential Indigenous Bride,

Arguing in Favour of Harmon’s Intentions

In pre-confederate Canada, one of the major phenomena that occurred were the marriages between European fur traders and Indigenous women. These marriages were common place from the seventeenth to eighteenth centuries but became more prevalent in the early 1800s when the fur trade began to incorporate women into the business at greater rates to meet demand[1]. In Harmon’s Journal, a journal kept by a European fur trader in the early 1800s, there is a passage he kept about a potential Indigenous bride in which he debates the pros and cons of marrying the girl, noting that she will not fit well in white society so he might have to hand her off to a better, younger man when he returns home[2]. The way in which Harmon writes about this event suggests that this is the proper, common thing to do in this situation. He never shows any concern for the young girl’s feelings on the matter, yet he views this act as a kindness[3], suggesting that he does not simply dismiss her well being for his own convenience. The overall tone of the passage simply states that this is the way things were done back then, arising many questions about societal views of this type of relationship. Is passing the girl off an example of him objectifying her? How would the wife feel about this arrangement, and how would her tribe? Is it really for her benefit or his? Would European culture reject her if she went with him, would she be unable to make it there with a family? The research suggests that this type of objectification was not common among white, fur trader husbands and that what Harmon wrote was true; not only would handing her off to someone else when he left most likely be her preference, and her family’s preference, but it would also be for her own good, due to how Indigenous peoples were treated at the time.

In general, these marriages were popular among the fur traders as they provided connections to the wife’s tribe, and therefore an advantage over their rivals[4]. However, the fur traders favoured the more ambitious brides, such as healers, warriors, hunters and even fellow traders[5] all of whom were revered among their people and treated with respect[6]. This was because when the Europeans first started to send the Jesuits to convert the indigenous peoples to Catholicism they targeted women in order for this knowledge to be passed on to the children easier[7]. They also tried to impose a patriarchal structure on these tribes, but it fell through as the Jesuits were recalled[8]. Resulting in the women, who now had an extensive insight on the religion, to begin to form connections with the European settlers, eventually turning into to vast kinships by the 1800s which encompassed both European and Indigenous networks[9]. French fur traders were especially eager to marry these women and join their households, creating a family dynamic in which the woman controlled a majority of the resources and merchandise[10]. This makes it clear that a certain level of respect was present in the relationship and that the indigenous women were valued by their husbands for their skills and talents.

The women, for their part, embraced these marriages and sought them out on their own without an elder to arrange it for them[11], for it was their belief that marrying a fur trader would make them negotiators of change, able to bring peace among the settlers and the natives and benefit both sides[12]. Moreover, when an indigenous woman married a fur trader it greatly enhanced her power and prestige among her own community[13]. An extraordinary feat when considering some of the practices held by certain tribes.

For example, the Ojibwa tribe, which settled amongst the Great Lakes, held views of male supremacy over women even before the settlers arrived[14]. They had set gender roles for both men and women with men receiving the more valued position as hunters and warriors with women left unappreciated as domestic workers[15]. This was disquieted as the fur trade began to take root because as women began to marry the fur traders they brought their tribe access to advanced technologies, tobacco, and business with the Fur Trade[16]. The Ojibwa women were quick to use this new-found power to their advantage, inserting themselves as auxiliaries in the trapping process, controlling the flow of information and goods from both ends, effectively rising out of their domestic roles and becoming leaders in the community[17].

Overall, these marriages were firmly embraced by the Indigenous community and were encouraged by their leaders[18]. The indigenous communities taught their women to not be passive in their relationships in order to be affective in gaining ties with traders[19]. They had to exert influence and be active communicators of information, but make sure that they reaped the benefits as well[20].  However, ties with the fur traders was not the only thing sought after, a legitimate marital bond was far more beneficial to the community as it incorporated the husband into the household where he could also be used as a negotiator for the tribe[21].

When a marriage between an indigenous woman and a European fur trader took place it was uncommon that the woman would marry out of her family[22]. Instead, she would integrate her husband into her household, making him a member of the tribe rather than her reinventing herself as French or British[23]. Once this happened, the white trader could now be chosen by the tribe to negotiate on their behalf with his own community or scout out land for the tribe to resettle or expand upon[24]. This is a fascinating aspect of these joinings, as it allows the woman in the relationship to gain even more power in her community, and therefore increase her standing with other fur traders.

Unfortunately, this power did not appear to stand with the whole of the European community. It is curious to think that even though both the fur traders and the Indigenous communities could see the mutual benefits that could be scourged from these marriages, the white community could not. However, it was not as if European society completely rejected the idea interracial marriage, as feminist writer Sylvia Van Kirk mentions in her book, Many Tender Ties, these indigenous women seeking business or trade were often received better by the white community when they were married to a European fur trader[25]. In fact, another benefit given to these women was a present opportunity to become an independent fur trader, as their ties to their husbands often allowed for a leg up in the trade based on integrity and influence[26]. Though, more often than not they would find that their sex and their race would have them hitting continuous walls along the way.

Some Europeans viewed indigenous brides as chattel, trade items owned by their husbands like the furs and equipment they sold[27]. The ideology of gender roles held by the Europeans also played into this, as their view of women as domestic home makers obscured their view of native women, often causing them to dismiss their contributions to trade effort and society as a whole[28]. Evidence of this is seen in the lack of narratives found within the fur trade about the contributions of women[29].

Another example of this appears in one of the rare instances where an indigenous woman enters her husband’s society, where she is met with hostility and resistance. In white society an indigenous woman and her half-bred children rarely held the same class-status as the white father/husband, they almost never inherited any of his land or wealth and were shunned by their peers[30]. After the husband died, his mixed race family was left at the mercy of the government and its societal bias[31]. Thus, the family was often split up white relatives or driven back to Indigenous territory, denied any inheritance or benefits, and basically left with the clothes on their backs[32]. If the widow or her children tried to fight back and reclaim what they were owed they would most likely be met with hate crimes courtesy of their neighbours or the husband’s extended family[33]. If the husband had had any white children, before or after he started his new family, they would claim the inheritance automatically and the indigenous or mixed race kin would be persecuted even more harshly[34].

Clearly in the 1800s there was a present degree of racism directed at indigenous brides in general. Explaining the common theme of the husband joining the wife’s household instead of the traditional European way of the wife joining his. Also, shining light on why indigenous communities would encourage such assertiveness in their women, preparing them for the harsh bigotry associated with their potential marriage, and why the fur traders themselves preferred these bold women to a more submissive wife.

Looking back on the passage in Harmon’s Journal concerning his potential bride, his motivations seem purer and even somewhat kind, as he suggested. Harmon obviously wanted to reap the benefits of an indigenous bride, allowing for him to gain access to the family’s connections, resources and knowledge[35]. The girl’s mother, who suggested the marriage, saw some benefit in joining her daughter with Harmon, whether it be for her community, her daughter or both is unclear[36]. For her part, the daughter most likely sought the elevated social status and prestige given to those who married fur traders, suggesting that she was not only open to this marriage but may have even encouraged it[37]. As for Harmon’s intentions of handing the girl off to another man in the future[38], it can now be seen as the best option for the girl. He is correct to worry about her entrance into white society, as it would most likely result in her being demoralized and facing unnecessary hardship. However, if he were to hand her over to another fur trader she would be able to maintain her elevated status among her community, continue creating ties that would benefit her tribe, and possibly lead to her making a career as a fur trader herself[39]. Besides, the girl would probably be eager to create even more ties with the fur trade, thus expanding her own network[40]. Overall, it seems Harmon truly had the girl’s best interests at heart and found the beneficial option for her out of the current situation. He clearly saw the girl as a person, possibly one of high regard, and not an object he could just toss away, justifying his intentions with her for the time period.

 

 

Bibliography

 

Primary Source:

Harmon, Daniel Williams, W. Kaye Lamb, and Daniel Williams Harmon. Harmon’s journal, 1800-1819. n.p.: Victoria, B.C. : TouchWood Editions, 2006., 2006.

 

Secondary Sources:

Hyde, Anne F. “The Blue Flower and the Account Book: Writing a History of Mixed-Blood Americans.” Pacific Historical Review 85, no. 1 (February 2016): 1-22. MLA International Bibliography, EBSCOhost (accessed October 25, 2016).

 

Sleeper-Smith, Susan. “Women, kin, and Catholicism: New perspectives on the fur trade.” Ethnohistory 47, no. 2 (Spring 2000 2000): 423-452. Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost (accessed October 25, 2016).

 

White, Bruce M. “The woman who married a beaver: Trade patterns and gender roles in the Ojibwa fur trade.” Ethnohistory 46, no. 1 (Winter 99 1999): 109. Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost (accessed October 25, 2016).

 

 

 

 

[1] Hyde, Anne F. “The Blue Flower and the Account Book” in Pacific Historical Review 85 (N/A: N/A, 2016),5.

[2] Harmon, Daniel Williams, W. Kaye Lamb, and Daniel Williams Harmon. Harmon’s journal, 1800-1819. n.p.: (Victoria, B.C. : TouchWood Editions, 2006., 2006), 84.

[3] Harmon, Harmon’s Journal, 1800-1819, 84.

[4] Sleeper-Smith, Susan. “Women, kin and Catholicism” in Ethnohistory 47, no. 2 (N/A: N/A, 2000), 424.

[5] White, Bruce M. “The woman who married a beaver” in Ethnohistory 46, no. 1 (N/A: N/A, 1999), 134.

[6] White, Bruce M. “The woman who married a beaver” in Ethnohistory 46, no. 1 (N/A: N/A, 1999), 137.

[7] Sleeper-Smith, Susan. “Women, kin and Catholicism” in Ethnohistory 47, no. 2 (N/A: N/A, 2000), 426.

[8] Sleeper-Smith, Susan. “Women, kin and Catholicism” in Ethnohistory 47, no. 2 (N/A: N/A, 2000), 430.

[9] Sleeper-Smith, Susan. “Women, kin and Catholicism”, 426.

[10]Sleeper-Smith, Susan. “Women, kin and Catholicism” in Ethnohistory 47, no. 2 (N/A: N/A, 2000), 429.

[11]White, Bruce M. “The woman who married a beaver” in Ethnohistory 46, no. 1 (N/A: N/A, 1999),133-134.

[12]Sleeper-Smith, Susan. “Women, kin and Catholicism” in Ethnohistory 47, no. 2 (N/A: N/A, 2000), 424.

[13] Sleeper-Smith, Susan. “Women, kin and Catholicism”, 424.

[14] White, Bruce M. “The woman who married a beaver” in Ethnohistory 46, no. 1 (N/A: N/A, 1999),111.

[15] White, Bruce M. “The woman who married a beaver”, 111.

[16] White, Bruce M. “The woman who married a beaver”, 111.

[17] White, Bruce M. “The woman who married a beaver” in Ethnohistory 46, no. 1 (N/A: N/A, 1999), 112.

[18] White, Bruce M. “The woman who married a beaver” in Ethnohistory 46, no. 1 (N/A: N/A, 1999),133-134

[19] White, Bruce M. “The woman who married a beaver” in Ethnohistory 46, no. 1 (N/A: N/A, 1999), 135.

[20] White, Bruce M. “The woman who married a beaver”, 135.

[21] Hyde, Anne F. “The Blue Flower and the Account Book” in Pacific Historical Review 85 (N/A: N/A, 2016), 10.

[22] Sleeper-Smith, Susan. “Women, kin and Catholicism” in Ethnohistory 47, no. 2 (N/A: N/A, 2000), 420.

[23] Sleeper-Smith, Susan. “Women, kin and Catholicism” in Ethnohistory 47, no. 2 (N/A: N/A, 2000), 420.

[24] Hyde, Anne F. “The Blue Flower and the Account Book” in Pacific Historical Review 85 (N/A: N/A, 2016), 10.

[25] White, Bruce M. “The woman who married a beaver” in Ethnohistory 46, no. 1 (N/A: N/A, 1999), 113.

[26] White, Bruce M. “The woman who married a beaver”, 113.

[27] White, Bruce M. “The woman who married a beaver” in Ethnohistory 46, no. 1 (N/A: N/A, 1999), 133.

[28] White, Bruce M. “The woman who married a beaver” in Ethnohistory 46, no. 1 (N/A: N/A, 1999), 114.

[29] White, Bruce M. “The woman who married a beaver”, 114.

[30] Hyde, Anne F. “The Blue Flower and the Account Book” in Pacific Historical Review 85 (N/A: N/A, 2016), 6.

[31]Hyde, Anne F. “The Blue Flower and the Account Book”, 6.

[32] Hyde, Anne F. “The Blue Flower and the Account Book” in Pacific Historical Review 85 (N/A: N/A, 2016), 10.

[33] Hyde, Anne F. “The Blue Flower and the Account Book” in Pacific Historical Review 85 (N/A: N/A, 2016), 11.

[34] Hyde, Anne F. “The Blue Flower and the Account Book” in Pacific Historical Review 85 (N/A: N/A, 2016), 13.

[35] Sleeper-Smith, Susan. “Women, kin and Catholicism” in Ethnohistory 47, no. 2 (N/A: N/A, 2000), 424.

[36] Harmon, Harmon’s Journal, 1800-1819, 84.

[37] White, Bruce M. “The woman who married a beaver” in Ethnohistory 46, no. 1 (N/A: N/A, 1999), 133-134.

[38] Harmon, Daniel Williams, W. Kaye Lamb, and Daniel Williams Harmon. Harmon’s journal, 1800-1819. n.p.: (Victoria, B.C. : TouchWood Editions, 2006., 2006), 84.

[39] Sleeper-Smith, Susan. “Women, kin and Catholicism”, 424.

[40] Sleeper-Smith, Susan. “Women, kin and Catholicism” in Ethnohistory 47, no. 2 (N/A: N/A, 2000), 426.