to return to their ancestral territories were paramount, even though their domain was substantially less than what it had formerly been. In addition, as political scientist David Wilkins points out, treaties “have an ongoing symbolic and substantive significance and are still the most important device for cre- ating and maintaining the unique political relationship between tribes and the United States.”14
From the Navajo perspective the
Treaty reflects the foundation of the U.S.– Navajo relationship. The Navajo people trust that the United States will fulfill its legal and moral obligations under the Treaty.15
Even
though the Treaty anticipated the eventual assimilation of the Navajo, it also created the physical space and opportunity for the Na- vajo to define and exercise sovereignty and self-government. Navajo leaders and com- munity activists have used this opportunity to develop a cultural dimension of Navajo sovereignty, one that links the Navajo Nation to “its territory, its environment, its neigh- bors and entails the people’s right to think and act freely and to meet their own needs as they see fit.”16 Under the Treaty, the Navajo agreed to
cease war against the United States and allow structures and buildings where federal au- thorities could oversee their obligations to the Navajo. The United States agreed to provide annuities for 10 years. Federal agents thought that 10 years of annuities would be enough to move the nation to self-sufficiency. Other provisions allowed for the allotment of the land for farming (a provision that was largely not implemented), and the Navajo agreed not to oppose the construction of railroads through their country. Perhaps one provision that remains contentious is the stipulation that Navajo children would be afforded an American education. Indeed, Manuelito sent his own sons to the Carlisle Indian Industrial School in Pennsylvania because he believed education could be a tool for protecting sover- eignty. At Fort Sumner, N.M., Manuelito had said, “Life does not end. It goes on.”17
In 1874,
together with his wife, son and other Navajo leaders, he led a delegation to Washington, D.C., to affirm Navajo land rights.18 The Treaty confirms the Navajo Nation’s
rights and powers to regulate its own affairs without undue interference. These rights and powers include the ability to make laws, ex- ecute and apply them, and impose and collect taxes.19
In particular, in the 1959 case Wil-
liams v. Lee the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the Navajo Nation’s right to regulate non- Indian companies that do business on Navajo
Museum staff who are members of the Navajo Nation and/or Apache tribes assisted in the installation of Juanita’s weaving and loom in the Nation to Nation gallery on Feb. 8, 2018. Elayne Silversmith (top right), librarian with the Museum's Vine Deloria Jr. Library, and essay author Jennifer Denetdale are both descendants of Juanita.
SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION 29
PHOTOS COURTESY OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM OF THE AMERICAN INDIAN
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52
