Why the extensive use of Indian figures on Nineteenth and early 20th century coinage?
Coinstartled
Posts: 10,135 ✭✭✭✭✭
I won't speculate as It would only be a guess.
0
Comments
I don't know either...guilt? Look what the mint is going to produce with $100 gold coins. They better not forget any group as we are a melting pot!
A work up for all the cowboy and Indian movies to follow in the 1930's to 1960's? A convenient time to re-write history after most people who lived it were passing away.
This is probably a difficult and controversial subject where there is guaranteed to be strong opinions on both sides, but I will foolishly jump right in…
I am pretty certain that the appearance of so many Indians on our coins (and banknotes) was out of reverence and respect. That might sound funny to some since the poor (to say the least) treatment of Native Americans in the 19th century is well known, but perhaps historical revisionism has erased memories of the good will that many Americans showed toward Indians.
The Indian Head cent seems to be a bit of a conundrum as it was honoring a culture that in many places was still under assault. But, by the early 20th century (Buffalo nickel, gold coins), there was a popular fascination and appreciation for Indians and their culture. Famous Indian chiefs toured with Wild West shows, appeared in parades, etc. (Earning a living in the white man’s world was probably not their first choice, but it was no doubt a welcome change from being massacred or starved to death).
According to the Wikipedia entry for American Indian Wars, “after 1776, many conflicts were local, involving disputes over land use, and some entailed cycles of reprisal.” As the 19th century progressed I suppose that settlers in western territories might have had a different perspective, but in the “civilized” parts of the US, Indians were presumably not seen as potential adversaries but rather as a more benign curiosity and were somewhat romanticized.
Coins, banknotes, various statues and memorials – the early 20th century saw a lot of recognition for Native Americans. Back then you had Indians on your pocket change, standing watch outside your tobacconist, as guests of honor in your 4th of July parade, etc. All of these representations were meant as positive signs, representing achievements or values that people admired.
That’s my take on it, anyway.
I think along the line somewhere someone decided Indians are pretty cool.
Alright, guilt it is.
I could guess but it would only be speculation.
As you were at Little Big Horn...please share your thoughts!
The gist of Mint and Treasury documents center on two reasons: 1) Native American headdress as a unique expression of America that clearly divides it from Europe, and 2) nostalgia for simpler times past and a romantic view of discovery.
Of course, the 1907 $10 and 1908 $5, $2.50 were perversions of President Roosevelt - nothing more.
Indians were the "Native" Americans on our continent. While we consolidated their tribal culture into a European culture, focus on the original culture by respecting the original Americans was very practical politically as our currency could not look British, Italian or French. Or Irish....... I find it to be a great tribute to the true founders of America.
I collect Indian coins in their memory and respective of their largely and not respected contribution to our country.
OINK
From Wiki,
By numismatic legend, Longacre's Indian Head cent design was based on the features of his daughter Sarah; the tale runs that she was at the mint one day when she tried on the headdress of one of a number of Native Americans who were visiting and her father sketched her. However, Sarah Longacre was 30 years old and married, not 12 as in the tale, in 1858, Longacre himself stated that the face was based on a statue of Venus in Philadelphia on loan from the Vatican. James Longacre did often sketch his elder daughter, and there are resemblances between the depiction of Sarah Longacre and the various representations of Liberty on Longacre's coins of the 1850s.
There were still Indian wars in the mid and late 1800's including the last major Sioux war in 1875 over gold in the Black Hills. Perceptions changed in the 1900's as time passed along and a lot of historical commemoratives included Indians as part of our unique history, and I think as time passed they were finally given more respect.
My US Mint Commemorative Medal Set
Intriguing topic... not sure it has a clear answer. Likely part of all suggested above. Certainly there was a kind of reverent interest in the Indian culture at that time - since most in the East no longer considered them a threat. Those who actually knew what had transpired were mainly interested in covering it up and such tribute served to further that aim. Cheers, RickO
It was our first attempt at reparations and recognition of a valued people. Then came Susan B Anthony 20 years later... fighting for rights to correct the wrong
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
The Indian images on U.S. coins started in 1854 with James Longacre when he introduced his Type II gold dollar and Three Dollar Gold Piece designs. The gold dollar design failed, but the Three Dollar Gold Piece design became his favorite from what I have read. In 1856 he adapted that design for the Type III gold dollar. In 1859 he introduced the Indian Head Cent.
Prior to taking the Chief Engraver’s job at the mint, Longacre cut picture plates for books. I have not seen much of that work, but I would be willing to bet that anything he did concerning the western lands included Indians.
Americans seem to have a fascination with “the noble savage,” the people who survived and lived off the land. The trouble was to many Americans coveted the land upon which the Indians, and when the Indians got in the way, they were very often removed. This is one big paradox in American history along with slavery. Americans have often talked about freedom, but they didn’t always support or practice it.
The Buffalo Nickel has been called the most American of all coins. It features a very realistic image of an Indian on the obverse and the American buffalo on the reverse. It is a great design although like most designs that were brought in during the American coin Renaissance era, which was covered so well by Roger Burdette, it was not totally practical for mass coin production. The same held true for the Indian $2.50 and $5.00 gold coins which did not fare that well in circulation.
Theodore Roosevelt, James Frazer, James Longacre and Bella Lyon Pratt all had idealized visions of the American Indian, but at least in the case of the politician, Theodore Roosevelt, that did not translate into the significant reforms that might have address Indian issues.
Good talk. Good info and opinions. So we had to wait until 2007 to see a cowboy on a coin? Or am I forgetting something?
Insert witicism here. [ xxx ]
Best summation so far.
This is my thinking as well. The Indian Removal Act was signed by Andrew Jackson in 1830 and most Indians had been removed from east of the Mississippi by the end of the Second Seminole War in 1842. By the 1850s, people started to reminisce about Indian culture.
@RogerB said: "Of course, the 1907 $10 and 1908 $5, $2.50 were perversions of President Roosevelt - nothing more."
IMO, calling these coins "perversions" is a low blow. While two of them are unusual and may be unattractive to many, the Ten Dollar Indians are "Classic" beauties. Thanks ASG! Thanks Mr. Roosevelt for your influence on our coinage.
We gave them liberty?
They were imposed by Roosevelt over nearly unanimous objections of the best American artists....the exceptions being Bela Pratt, and.....hmmm, who else?
They are perversions in the sense that they bore no reasonable connection to the "figure emblematic of Liberty" as required by law, and they pandered to TR's personal interests.
ASG refused to stick a headdress on the striding Liberty figure and added it to Liberty (i.e., Nike Erini) on the $10 only after being badgered by Roosevelt. The President made the final design selections for the $10 and $20, and Sturgis Bigelow convinced him to add yet another headdress on the $5.
Sure, Roosevelt was a major political patron of the new gold designs and Lincoln cent, but only the $20 was close to the top notch coin design they might have been.
Good information!
To pay homage to the original native Americans.
It's because Indians were always recognized as being part of the original "America", from long before they were depicted on US coins during the 1850s.
This is not speculation nor subject to looking back from now and our present views on how the Indians were treated but rather derived from chronological observations of the depiction of Indians on our money, specifically paper money.
Indians were depicted on U.S. obsolete currency with increasing frequency from the 1790s through the 1860s. Indians were used as representations of America and often paired with other women who represented Liberty, Agriculture, and other allegories. Other times, they were more realistically depicted but usually with some sort of message or symbolism, unlike the plain portraits on the coinage. By the 1850s, the depiction of Indians on banknotes was quite commonplace. They are among the most common vignettes and there are several hundred different ones.
Below are a couple of depictions of Indians on currency.
The top note shows an Indian family and a teacher with students on either side of a shield representing America. On the left is the "old way" and on the right the future, led by knowledge. It seems to say "We're united as Americans but our way is the future."
The second note shows the wild savage contemplating a plow, farming instead of hunting. At right is a similar theme with Ceres, representing Agriculture showing a Native American woman (America) agricultural treasures (including a pineapple!).
My Coin Blog
My Toned Lincoln Registry Set
The use of the word "savage" by the English, French, and then, later, Americans, was widely accepted and doomed the Native Americans from the start.
As soon as one culture dehumanizes another, it feels free to unleash its own impulses, and that is when the true "savagery" begins.
Our ancestors, unfortunately, first displaced and/or killed Native Americans, and then, later, decided to depict the vanishing lifestyle and heritage of the victims on coins, stamps, notes, and to name streets and cities after them.
But it was important to get rid of them first.
Wonderfully specific information here. Thanks for the factual, historical presentations.
Here's a warning parable for coin collectors...
Aside from the "Caucasian in a head dress" stuff, I think, as do others here, that it was primarily guilt.
It seems what really doomed the Indians was that the Federal government promised Georgia it would remove Indian land ownership within the state and had to pass the Indian Removal Act to make good on the promise. Washington proposed and Jefferson supported acculturation to have Indians assimilate into American culture, only to be overturned by Jackson. The following excerpt is
Here are some acculturation photos. With respect to the IHC, it's interesting that Indians wore Anglo-European clothes while on the IHC, an woman of European descent wore Indian clothes (headdress). Seems that while some wanted Indians to acculturate, others preferred them before acculturation, perhaps as savages.