The document discusses the history of legislation and policies in Canada that have shaped Aboriginal identities and communities, including the Indian Act. It describes how: 1) The Indian Act classified Aboriginal peoples and determined who was and was not "Indian", separating people from their traditional identities and relationships to land. 2) The Act discriminated against Aboriginal women by denying status and band membership to those who married non-Aboriginal men. 3) Over time, these policies eroded Aboriginal populations and forced Indigenous peoples to navigate colonial systems of identity in order to maintain their communities, facing ongoing struggles over determining authenticity and entitlement. The document analyzes how Canadian law and policies supplanted traditional Aboriginal ways of identifying oneself

1. EDU 211: Aboriginal Education and
Context for Professional Engagement
September 17th 2013
Dr. Cora Weber-Pillwax

2. Identity
EDU 211
Thursday September 12
Dr. Cora Weber-Pillwax and Elder John Crier

8. File:SB - Altay shaman with
drum.jpg

9. Understanding Aboriginal social systems, including relationship
structures and roles and identities.
Aboriginal/Indigenous peoples live under systems of identity
classification and control in Canada and the United States.
“These regulatory systems have forcibly supplanted traditional
Indigenous ways of identifying the self in relation to land and
community, functioning discursively to naturalize colonial
worldviews. Decolonization, then, must involve deconstructing
and reshaping how we understand Indigenous identity”. Gender,
Race, and the Regulation of Native Idenitity in Canada & the
United States: An Overview (Bonita Lawrence, 2003)

10. Canadian Legislation affecting Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Relations
Summary of Legislation showing affirmation of Aboriginal and
Treaty Rights and Legislation reinforcing Assimilation (Gail
Jardine, 2012; p. 29)
Royal Proclamation 1763
Gradual Civilization Act 1857
British North American Act 1867
The Gradual Enfranchisement Act 1869
The Indian Act 1867 (ongoing amendments, including Bill-C31 in
1985)
Treaty Six (1876), Seven (1877), Eight (1899) in Alberta
Constitution Act 1982
Charter of Rights and Freedoms 1982

11. Classification under the Indian Act removes the right to be identified within a
people’s culture (citing Acoose in Lawrence, 2003; p. 5)
• “Contemporary Native identity therefore exists … between concepts
of generic ‘Indianness’ as a racial identity and of specific ‘tribal’
identity as Indigenous nationhood.” (p.5)
• Attacking the social status of Aboriginal women undermined “the
power of Native societies in general”. (citing Allen in Lawrence,
2003; p.5)
Write a one-page reflection for your seminar on this question:
What are your thoughts in response to this understanding of the role of
Aboriginal women in relation to Aboriginal communities? in what ways
might your own thoughts and understanding of this perspective help you
to work effectively with your Aboriginal students? with your nonAboriginal students?

12. History of Indian Act
• Britain defeated France in 1763
• Britain adhered to the nation –to- nation approach with
indigenous peoples “to consolidate its imperial position”
(p.6), hence the BNA 1763.
• Britain was responsible for Indian Affairs between 1763 until
1860.
• In 1850, Canada passed legislation that allowed for the
creation of indian reserves, (loose definition of ‘Indian’, for the
purpose of providing access to landbase for white settlers.
• Gradual Civilization Act 1857 reserve land into plots for
enfranchised men who would cease to be ‘Indian’.
• 1860 British crown transferred “control over ‘Indians’ to its
Canadian colony” (p.7)

13. History of Indian Act cont’d
• 1869 Gradual Enfranchisement Act – Indian woman marrying
white man lost her status as “Indian” and her right to band
membership.
• This created the concept of ‘status Indian’ and ‘nonstatus
Indian’; it codified “Indianness” so that the category could be
granted or withheld: an “Indian” woman who married a white
man was forced to leave her community, and lose her ‘Indian
status, and a white woman who married an Indian man would
gain Indian status and could live on “indian” land. This
remained in effect until 1985v with the passing of Bill C-31.

14. Consider the following quotes related to what Lawrence refers
to as “social engineering”:
• To understand how the Indian Act structured intermarriage…, “it is
important to explore the extent to which the regulation of
Indianness rested on colonial anxieties about white identity and who
would control settler societies” (p.8)
• Many distinct Metis communities in the Great Lakes area created
difficulties in in maintaining boundaries between the colonizers and
the colonized, , and social control was “predicated on legally
identifying who ‘white’, who was ‘Indian’, and which children were
legitimate progeny; citizen rather than subjugated ‘natives’ (Stoler
cited in Lawrence, p.8)
• children of European father-Native mother had to be classified white
to inherit land, so mother could no longer be Native; European
white women who married Native men were considered to have
stepped outside the social boundaries of whiteness and became
officially status Indians, along with their children.

15. In 1985 (Bill C-31), there were only 350000 status Indians left in
canada (Holmes cited in Lawrence, p.9)
Approximately 100000 individuals regained status by 1995
(Switzer cited in Lawrence, p.9)
Consider the Impact of this on cultural identity and survival of
peoples.

16. Differentiating “Indians” and “Halfbreeds”
• Indian Act 1876 excluded anyone who was not “pure Indian”,
explicitly referring to ‘halfbreeds’ – colonial categorization and
regulation.
• Differentiating did not conform to blood quantum or
individual self-identification. Contradictions between
government classifications and how the people saw
themselves. (Treaty 8 and 11, p.10 and 11)
• Scrip
• Nonstatus indians

17. Implications of legalized identities
• Discuss how the divisions between ‘Indians’ and ‘Metis’
populations led to differences in experiences of Nativeness.
(Lawrence, p. 12)

18. Other Considerations:
• Redefining Indianness: the realities of identity in communities in the
aftermath of the Indian Act
• “Fullbloodedness” in relation to “traditionalisness” (Vizenor 1981,
Blaeser 1996 cited in Lawrence, p.19)
• Defining Indians out of existence (Churchill 1994 cited in Lawrence,
p.19-20)
“In the interests of survival, communities use the colonizing systems of
identity categorization to maintain boundaries against white society. In
this way, “…the grammar of regulatory regimes has shaped how native
identity is conceptualized.” (p21)
Identity in relation to lived experiences of most Native people.

19. Other considerations cont’d
• Nativeness (or Aboriginal identity) theorized as something
negotiated and evolving rather than as an “authentic essence”
can have “dangerous repercussions for Native people in terms
of asserting Aboriginal rights” (p. 22)
• In relation to land claims, for example, the need to
demonstrate or prove their authenticity and primordiality to
whites in terms of their Indianness.
• The high demands for “authenticity” of contemporary Indian
existence (Aboriginal identity) implies some risks (p.23). What
might some of these be?

20. Closing thoughts to consider:
• “Traditional Indigenous ways of anchoring relationships among
individuals, their communities and the land” were supplanted by
systems of classification. According to Lawrence, these also erased
“knowledge of self, culture and history in the process”.
• These significant characteristics of relationship in Indigenous
identity formation processes remain in place today for Aboriginal
individuals and communities, and are seen in the ways that the
personal and social, the individual and collective aspects of identity
are given expression.
• Lawrence concludes by stating that until “ traditional models of
governance have been reclaimed and actualized, Native
communities will continue to be plagued with struggles over
identity and entitlement barriers”.

21. Reflection to take to the Seminar:
• What are your thoughts on these final three points? Share
these thoughts in two pages of reflections that situate you as
a future teacher with your own classroom that includes
Indigenous/Aboriginal/Native children.