What do you think?
Rate this book
No Surrender: The Land Remains Indigenous
Between 1869 and 1877 the government of Canada negotiated Treaties One through Seven with the Indigenous peoples of the Great Plains. Many historians argue that the negotiations suffered from cultural misunderstandings between the treaty commissioners and Indigenous chiefs, but newly uncovered eyewitness accounts show that the Canadian government had a strategic plan to deceive over the “surrender clause” and land sharing. / According to Sheldon Krasowski’s research, Canada understood that the Cree, Anishnabeg, Saulteaux, Assiniboine, Siksika, Piikani, Kainaa, Stoney and Tsuu T’ina nations wanted to share the land with newcomers—with conditions—but were misled over governance, reserved lands, and resource sharing. Exposing the government chicanery at the heart of the negotiations, No Surrender demonstrates that the land remains Indigenous.
392 pages, Kindle Edition
First published March 2, 2019
17 people are currently reading
412 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews
August 22, 2019
Fascinating in-depth examination of the negotiation process for the numbered treaties. Sheldon includes oral history, eye witness accounts, and the actual original treaty documents themselves in order to support his interpretation of the treaty making process and he makes some compelling arguments about the true intent of the treaties. This book is a rich portrayal of the history surrounding the treaties, but will challenge the reader to reconsider their own understanding of the treaties which has great significance to the present day as well!
October 1, 2023
3.5*
Krasowski is a historian first, and this is an academic history book. And that's fine. The thesis is well presented, extensively researched and certainly forwards the point that there were no misunderstandings between Euro-Canadians and Indigenous people when negotiating the numbered Treaties. If I were in an Indigenous History course, this book would be an invaluable resource, and even though I'm not in an Indigenous History course, I was able to gain a better understanding of this chapter of Canadian history and how it set the stage for where we are now. By using a combination of primary sources, oral histories, and a myriad of secondary sources, Krasowski gives us all the different factors that contributed to the context of each Treaty.
I really liked this book, but I didn't have fun reading it. Often times while reading this book, there would be a paragraph that would be the most fascinating thing. A portrait of a character from history whose own story would make an incredible movie. Scenes that felt downright cinematic, and blew me away with the fact that this actually happened. Moments of tension, or pure heart that really brought forth how important these Treaties were to so many people, and still are as important today. Those paragraphs however were overshadowed by pages upon pages of factual detail that quickly became homework. Like I said, Krasowski is a historian first, and that's okay. But what I wouldn't give for a writer to come in and create a historical, blockbusting epic that has the accurate details, while expanding on all the cinematic stuff that I wanted more of. I'm glad I read this, I think more Canadians should read this, but I also know that I'm only going to come back to it if I need to do research.
Krasowski is a historian first, and this is an academic history book. And that's fine. The thesis is well presented, extensively researched and certainly forwards the point that there were no misunderstandings between Euro-Canadians and Indigenous people when negotiating the numbered Treaties. If I were in an Indigenous History course, this book would be an invaluable resource, and even though I'm not in an Indigenous History course, I was able to gain a better understanding of this chapter of Canadian history and how it set the stage for where we are now. By using a combination of primary sources, oral histories, and a myriad of secondary sources, Krasowski gives us all the different factors that contributed to the context of each Treaty.
I really liked this book, but I didn't have fun reading it. Often times while reading this book, there would be a paragraph that would be the most fascinating thing. A portrait of a character from history whose own story would make an incredible movie. Scenes that felt downright cinematic, and blew me away with the fact that this actually happened. Moments of tension, or pure heart that really brought forth how important these Treaties were to so many people, and still are as important today. Those paragraphs however were overshadowed by pages upon pages of factual detail that quickly became homework. Like I said, Krasowski is a historian first, and that's okay. But what I wouldn't give for a writer to come in and create a historical, blockbusting epic that has the accurate details, while expanding on all the cinematic stuff that I wanted more of. I'm glad I read this, I think more Canadians should read this, but I also know that I'm only going to come back to it if I need to do research.
Read
June 19, 2019Review by Sarah Boivin:
Canada's claim to many Indigenous territories still hinges on a "surrender clause" in treaty texts. No Surrender: The Land Remains Indigenous, a recently published book from the University of Regina Press, uncovers the details of a Crown negotiating strategy to bury the surrender clause in treaty negotiations.
Taking direction from Indigenous nations' work documenting their oral treaty histories, author Sheldon Krasowski, a non-Indigenous historian at Athabasca University, finds that long-neglected written sources from the negotiations consistently substantiate Indigenous perspectives on treaty terms.
The texts of Treaties One through Seven, negotiated between 1871 and 1877, each contain this templated clause stating signatory nations would "cede, release, surrender, and yield up" their lands.
Oral histories and laws of Indigenous nations who negotiated these treaties (Cree, Anishinaabe, Saulteaux, Nakoda, Siksika, Piikani, Kainai, Stoney and Tsuu T’ina, who had been negotiating treaties long before Treaty One) state the treaties were not land surrenders but agreements to share their vast territories for specific uses -- broadly, settlement and farming -- in exchange for agreed provisions and protections.
Keep reading: http://rabble.ca/books/reviews/2019/0...
Canada's claim to many Indigenous territories still hinges on a "surrender clause" in treaty texts. No Surrender: The Land Remains Indigenous, a recently published book from the University of Regina Press, uncovers the details of a Crown negotiating strategy to bury the surrender clause in treaty negotiations.
Taking direction from Indigenous nations' work documenting their oral treaty histories, author Sheldon Krasowski, a non-Indigenous historian at Athabasca University, finds that long-neglected written sources from the negotiations consistently substantiate Indigenous perspectives on treaty terms.
The texts of Treaties One through Seven, negotiated between 1871 and 1877, each contain this templated clause stating signatory nations would "cede, release, surrender, and yield up" their lands.
Oral histories and laws of Indigenous nations who negotiated these treaties (Cree, Anishinaabe, Saulteaux, Nakoda, Siksika, Piikani, Kainai, Stoney and Tsuu T’ina, who had been negotiating treaties long before Treaty One) state the treaties were not land surrenders but agreements to share their vast territories for specific uses -- broadly, settlement and farming -- in exchange for agreed provisions and protections.
Keep reading: http://rabble.ca/books/reviews/2019/0...
May 31, 2019
Possibly the most important book I have read about the Prairies.
May 17, 2021
Sheldon Krasowski’s No Surrender: The Land Remains Indigenous delivers a convincing analysis that the treaty-making process and its outcomes were not purely the result of cultural misunderstanding. Instead, he argues that the government downplayed their goal of obtaining land and undermined the nature of the treaty relationship. Krasowski utilizes oral history and Indigenous research methods to make this argument. His sources include new oral histories from Elders, which bring in new perspectives and understanding of the treaty-making process. As he states, “a book like this one especially comes out of years of talking to and developing relationships with others who share their knowledge…I was fortunate to meet many Elders who are experts on treaties.” He also uses eyewitness accounts of the treaties from missionaries, North West Mounted Police (NWMP), and settlers who recorded the events in journals and letters. However, the written sources do not contradict the oral sources. Krasowski notes that although oral sources must be looked at carefully, considering the speakers and recorder, they are not in conflict with written sources but rather focus on different aspects and fill in many gaps that written records left. Through these sources, he claims that Indigenous oral history shows no surrender of lands.
An interesting example of Krasowski’s use of oral sources comes in the introduction. He points out the oral account of the Nanaimo Treaty, signed in British Columbia as part of the Douglas Treaties in the 1850s, shows a different perspective of the treaty. The treaty mainly focused "more on the purchase of coal than on the land surrender, which explains the absence of treaty terms in the document." This brief example puts into question Hall’s point on context. Whereas Hall argues that Treaty 7 signees likely possessed some understanding of government intent due to precedents set by previous treaty agreements, Krasowski argues that these agreements were fundamentally two separate agreements, with the oral promises left out of the written document. As well, in contrast to Hall, who argues that the translators struggled due to inexperience with both languages or words and topics that simply did not exist in the other language, Krasowski reasons that government representatives chose translators that suited their needs and “softened their interpretations…” of the land surrender clauses “…to avoid controversy.” Therefore, Krasowski refutes the cultural misunderstanding thesis based on the evidence found in oral sources and pushes forth the argument that the treaties were at least partly negotiated with dubious techniques and bad faith.
An interesting example of Krasowski’s use of oral sources comes in the introduction. He points out the oral account of the Nanaimo Treaty, signed in British Columbia as part of the Douglas Treaties in the 1850s, shows a different perspective of the treaty. The treaty mainly focused "more on the purchase of coal than on the land surrender, which explains the absence of treaty terms in the document." This brief example puts into question Hall’s point on context. Whereas Hall argues that Treaty 7 signees likely possessed some understanding of government intent due to precedents set by previous treaty agreements, Krasowski argues that these agreements were fundamentally two separate agreements, with the oral promises left out of the written document. As well, in contrast to Hall, who argues that the translators struggled due to inexperience with both languages or words and topics that simply did not exist in the other language, Krasowski reasons that government representatives chose translators that suited their needs and “softened their interpretations…” of the land surrender clauses “…to avoid controversy.” Therefore, Krasowski refutes the cultural misunderstanding thesis based on the evidence found in oral sources and pushes forth the argument that the treaties were at least partly negotiated with dubious techniques and bad faith.
January 28, 2021
This book was dense and I don’t think I would have finished it (or started it) or gotten nearly as much out of it without reading it with a book club. I recommend reading this with support.
That being said, it deserves 5 stars. Meticulously researched, it sets out to prove that the treaty commissioners were disingenuous and not forthcoming about the land surrender clause, and that they did not address the clause in oral negotiations, but slipped it into the text of the treaties later. The conclusion is that Indigenous people’s who signed treaties never surrendered their land title. It is very compelling.
Do not come into this book looking for a narrative or an accessible read - it is academic, and it is dry, and you will be frustrated and discouraged. If you come into this read knowing that you are coming for insight and education on the treaty-making process you will be richly rewarded.
That being said, it deserves 5 stars. Meticulously researched, it sets out to prove that the treaty commissioners were disingenuous and not forthcoming about the land surrender clause, and that they did not address the clause in oral negotiations, but slipped it into the text of the treaties later. The conclusion is that Indigenous people’s who signed treaties never surrendered their land title. It is very compelling.
Do not come into this book looking for a narrative or an accessible read - it is academic, and it is dry, and you will be frustrated and discouraged. If you come into this read knowing that you are coming for insight and education on the treaty-making process you will be richly rewarded.
September 13, 2021
This took me a long time to get through. The digital version is not well-formatted which makes navigation difficult so I just read it front to back and couldn’t really check the references. Lots of valuable information is contained and arguments for or against previous theories of why the treaties are viewed differently by the settler-colonial parties and the Indigenous parties. Maybe not a book for beginners but if you want more details about treaties 1-7 this book is very thorough and extensive.
May 26, 2023
Powerful
This was another important / timely read.
Really getting a lot out of these books lately.
I and found it a good book - another book as part of my Indigenous Awareness Week (this week).
4.4/5
This was another important / timely read.
Really getting a lot out of these books lately.
I and found it a good book - another book as part of my Indigenous Awareness Week (this week).
4.4/5
April 17, 2020
This would make a good textbook in a history class
May 19, 2020
Phenomenal work.
March 1, 2021
Dry at times, but incredibly important. A book that every Canadian should read in order to understand their treaty obligations and responsibilities.
August 28, 2021
Important content, but drowning in excessive detail at some points. Was a slow read.
June 14, 2019
Profound and enlightening. Deeply researched, objective.
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews