Trail Of Tears: The Relocation Of Native Americans

HIST101 B006 Sum 14
The Relocation of the Native Americans: An Analysis The forced relocation of thousands of Native Americans will remain a blemish on American history simply by virtue of the number of Native Americans that perished during this relocation, as well as the seeming lack of care by the United States. However, many believe that this relocation was something of a necessary evil. President Andrew Jackson was something of the figurehead for decisions regarding these relocations, but he was far from the only one. President Jackson was tasked with a difficult decision: leave the Indians be, avoiding conflict but hampering progress and growth, or force them to move west of the Mississippi so that settlers, merchants, and other trailblazers
The Trail of Tears, essentially, was the path taken by most Indians to get to their homes on reservations across the Mississippi River (Wallace 221-223). This Trail of Tears led to almost 2,000 deaths for the Cherokees alone, which were the largest of the Indian tribes and, thus, one of the most affected by the Trail of Tears (Perdue and Green 139). The Trail of Tears, therefore, was just as much of a political and emotional plight for the Cherokee and other Indian tribes as it was a physical one, especially in terms of the sheer body count, in addition to being forced from their homes. However, while the decision to relocate the Indians was a difficult and unfortunate one, it was not, necessarily, taken without cause. The prevailing reason for believing this is because Jackson 's decision to move the Cherokees west, along with many other native American tribes, resulted from necessity, rather than mere
These actions, initially, were a response to increasing conflicts between settlers and Native Americans, yet, by the end of the relocation of the Cherokee, the sentiment itself had been reformed to that of devout manifest destiny. The Jackson Administration 's decision to relocate the Cherokee was indeed more of a reformation of national policy and sentiments. The simple reason for this is that there are clear differences in both policy and sentiments prior to, during, and after the relocation, and this shift in sentiments and policy are what greatly contributed to an increase in Native American relocation efforts during this general time period (Pierce 22-25). This state of mind is considered by many to be callous and has led to a great amount of criticism as to the actual methods utilized to remove the Indians. Counter-arguments to this mode of thinking cite the increasing tensions and conflicts that were arising between settlers and Indians prior to their removal. In many respects, the removal of the Indians was done for their own good, in order to prevent continued casualties on both