North American fur trade

It was a common practice on the part of the Indian women to offer marriage and sometimes just sex in exchange for fur traders not trading with their rivals.[30] Radisson described visiting one Ojibwe village in the spring of 1660 where during the welcoming ceremony: "The women throw themselves backwards on the ground, thinking to give us tokens of friendship and wellcome [welcome]".[31] Radisson was initially confused by this gesture, but as the women started to engage in more overtly sexual behavior, he realized what was being offered. Radisson was informed by the village elders that he could have sex with any unmarried women in the village provided that he did not trade with the Dakota (aka Sioux), who were the enemies of the Ojibwe at the time.[31]

Likewise, the fur trader Alexander Henry in visiting an Ojibwe village in what is now Manitoba in 1775 described the "facility with which the women abandoned themselves to my "Canadiens" to such an extent that he believed it would cause violence as the Ojibwe men would become jealous, causing him to order his party to leave at once, though it is likely that the women were in fact acting with the approval of their menfolk.[31] Henry claimed that he had left at once out of the fear of violence from jealous Ojibwe men, but it seemed more likely that he was afraid that his French-Canadian voyageurs might enjoy themselves too much with the Ojibwe women at this one village and would not want to travel further west.[31]

American historian Bruce White described the way in which the Ojibwe and the other Indian peoples sought to "use sexual relations as a means of establishing long-term relationships between themselves and people from another society was a rational strategy, one that has been described in many parts of the world".[31] One fur trader who married an Ojibwe woman himself described how the Ojibwe would initially shun a fur trader until they could give gauge his honesty and provided he proved himself an honest man, "the chiefs would take together their marriageable girls to his trading house and he was given the choice of the lot".[31] If the fur trader married, the Ojibwe would trade with him as he became part of the community and if he refused to marry, then the Ojibwe would not trade with him as Ojibwe only traded with a man who "took one of their women for his wife".[31]

Virtually all Indian communities encouraged fur traders to take an Indian wife in order to build a long-term relationship that would ensure the continual supply of European goods to their communities and discourage fur traders from dealing with other Indian tribes.[31] The fur trade did not involve barter in the way that most people presuppose, but were a credit/debit relationship when a fur trader would arrive in a community in the summer or fall, hand out various goods to the Indians who would pay him back in the spring with the furs from the animals they had killed over the winter; in the interim, there much further exchanges, which often involved both Indian men and women.[32]

Indian men were the trappers who killed the animals for their furs, but normally it was the women who were in charge of the furs that their menfolk had collected, making women into important players in the fur trade.[33] Indian women normally harvested the rice and made the maple sugar that were such important parts of the traders' diets, for which they were usually paid with alcohol.[33] Henry mentioned how at one Ojibwe village, the men only wanted alcohol in exchange for furs while the women demanded a wide variety of European goods in exchange for rice.[34]

Manufacturing canoes was work done by both Indian men and women, and accounts of fur traders often mentioned bartering goods with women in exchange for canoes.[35] One French-Canadian voyageur named Michel Curot listed in his journal how in the course of one expedition, he traded goods for furs with Ojibwe men 19 times, with Ojibwe women 22 times, and another 23 times in which he did not list the gender of the people he was trading with.[36] As women held a very low status in French-Canada (Quebec did not grant women the right to vote until 1940), White argued it is likely that the majority of the anonymous Indians that Curot traded with were women whose names were not considered important enough to write down.[36]

For the Indians, dreams were viewed as messages from the world of the spirits, which was seen as a vastly more powerful and important world than the one inhabited by them.[37] Gender roles were not fixed in Indian communities, and it was possible for a woman who had dreams of herself performing a masculine role being able to persuade her community on the basis of her dreams to be allowed to take part in work that was normally performed by men, since this was evidently what the spirits wanted.[37] Ojibwe women in their teenage years embarked upon "vision quests" to find out what fate the spirits wanted for them.[38]

The Indians who lived around the Great Lakes believed that when a girl started to menstruate (regarded as giving women a special spiritual power) that whatever her dreams she might have were messages from the spirits, and many fur traders mentioned how women who were regarded as being especially favored with their dream-messages from the world of the spirits played important roles as decision-makers within their communities.[37] Netnokwa, a charismatic Ojibwe matron living in the Red River region whose dreams were considered to be especially powerful messages from the spirits, traded directly with fur traders.[39] John Tanner, her adopted son, noted she received "ten gallons of spirits" for free every year from the fur traders as it considered to be wise to stay in her good graces and whenever she visited Fort Mackinac "she was saluted by a gun from the fort".[39] As menstrual blood was seen as sign of women's spiritual power, it was understood that men must never touch it.[37]

When Ojibwe girls entered puberty, they embarked upon fasting and ceremonies that marked the beginning of their "vision quests" to establish a relationship with the spirits with their dreams being seen as messages from the spirit world.[37] Sometimes, Ojibwe girls would consume hallucinogenic mushrooms during their ceremonies to receive further messages from the world of the spirits. Having established a relationship with a particular spirit at puberty, women would go on further vision quests throughout their lives with more ceremonies and dreams to continue the relationship.[37]

Fur traders found that marrying the daughters of chiefs would ensure the co-operation of an entire community.[40] Marriage alliances were also made between Indian tribes. In September 1679, the French diplomat and soldier Daniel Greysolon, Sieur du Lhut, called a peace conference at Fond du Lac (modern Duluth, Minnesota) of all the "nations of the north" which was attended by Ojibwe, Dakota, and Assiniboine leaders, where it was agreed that the daughters and sons of the various chiefs would marry each other to promote peace and ensure the flow of French goods into the region.[41]

The French fur trader Claude-Charles Le Roy wrote that the Dakota had decided to make peace with their traditional enemies, the Ojibwe, in order to obtain French goods that the Ojibwe were blocking them from receiving.[41] Le Roy wrote the Dakota "could obtain French merchandise only through the agency of the Sauteurs [Ojibwe]" so they made "a treaty of peace by which they were mutually bound to give their daughters in marriage on both sides".[41] Indian marriages usually involved a simple ceremony involving the exchange of valuable gifts from the parents of the bride and groom, and unlike European marriages, could be dissolved at any time by one partner choosing to walk out.[41]

The Indians were organized into kinship and clan networks, and marrying a woman from one of these kinship networks would make a fur trader into a member of these networks, thereby ensuring that Indians belonging to whatever clan the trader had married into were more likely to deal only with him.[42] Furthermore, the fur traders discovered that the Indians were more likely to share food, especially during the hard months of winter, to those fur traders who were regarded as part of their communities.[42]

One fur trader who married an 18-year old Ojibwe girl described in his diary his "secret satisfaction at being compelled to marry for my safety".[43] The converse of such marriages was that a fur trader was expected to favor whatever clan/kinship network that he had married into with European goods, and a fur trader who did not would ruin his reputation. For the Ojibwe, like the other Indians, saw all life in this world being based upon reciprocal relationships, with Ojibwe women leaving behind "gifts" of tobacco when harvesting plants to thank nature for providing the plants while when a bear was killed, a ceremony was held to thank the bear for "giving" up its life to them.[38]

The Ojibwe believed if the plants and animals were not thanked for "giving" themselves to them, then the plants and animals would be less "giving" the next year, and the same principle applied to their relations with other peoples such as the fur traders.[38] The Ojibwe, like other First Nations, always believed that animals willingly allowed themselves to be killed, and that if a hunter failed to give thanks to the animal world, then the animals would be less "giving" the next time around.[38] As the fur traders were predominately male and heterosexual while there were few white women beyond the frontier, the Indians were well aware of the sexual attraction felt by the fur traders towards their women, who were seen as having a special power over white men.[44]

From the Ojibwe viewpoint, if one of their women gave herself to a fur trader, it created the reciprocal obligation for the fur trader to give back.[44] Fur-trading companies encouraged their employees to take Indian wives, not only to built long-term relationships that were good for business, but also because an employee with a wife would have to buy more supplies from his employer, with the money for the purchases usually subtracted from his wages.[42] White decried the tendency of many historians to see these women as simply "passive" objects that were bartered for by fur traders and Indian tribal elders, writing that these women had to "exert influence and be active communicators of information" to be effective as the wife of a fur trader, and that many of the women who married fur traders "embraced" these marriages to achieve "useful purposes for themselves and for the communities that they lived in".[45]

One study of the Ojibwe women who married French fur traders maintained that the majority of the brides were "exceptional" women with "unusual ambitions, influenced by dreams and visions—like the women who become hunters, traders, healers and warriors in Ruth Landes's account of Ojibwe women".[46] Out of these relationships emerged the Métis people whose culture was a fusion of French and Indian elements.

In 1793 Oshahgushkodanaqua, an Ojibwe woman from the far western end of Lake Superior, married John Johnston, a British fur trader based in Sault Ste. Marie working for the North West Company. Later in her old age, she gave an account to British writer Anna Brownell Jameson of how she came to be married.[46] According to Jameson's 1838 book Winter Studies and Summer Rambles in Canada, Oshahgushkodanaqua told her when she was 13, she embarked on her "vision quest" to find her guardian spirit by fasting alone in a lodge painted black on a high hill.[46] During Oshahgushkodanaqua's "vision quest":

"She dreamed continually of a white man, who approached her with a cup in his hand, saying "Poor thing! Why are you punishing yourself? Why do you fast? Here is food for you!" He was always accompanied by a dog, who looked up at her like he knew her. Also, she dreamed of being on a high hill, which was surrounded by water, and from which she beheld many canoes full of Indians, coming to her and paying her homage; after this, she felt as if she was being carried up into the heavens, and as she looked down on the earth, she perceived it was on fire and said to herself, "All my relations will be burned!", but a voice answered and said, "No, they will not be destroyed, they will be saved!", and she knew it was a spirit, because the voice was not human. She fasted for ten days, during which time her grandmother brought her at intervals some water. When satisfied that she had obtained a guardian spirit in the white stranger who haunted her dreams, she returned to her father's lodge".[47]

About five years later, Oshahgushkodanaqua first met Johnston, who asked to marry her, but was refused permission by her father who did not think he wanted a long-term relationship.[48] When Johnston returned the next year and again asked to marry Oshahgushkodanaqua, her father granted permission, but she herself declined, saying she disliked the implications of being married until death, but ultimately married under strong pressure from her father.[49] Oshahgushkodanaqua came to embrace her marriage when she decided that Johnston was the white stranger she saw in her dreams during her vision quest.[49]

The couple stayed married for 36 years with the marriage ending with Johnston's death, and Oshahgushkodanaqua played an important role in her husband's business career.[48] Jameson also noted Oshahgushkodanaqua was considered to be a strong woman among the Ojibwe, writing "in her youth she hunted and was accounted the surest eye and fleetest foot among the women of her tribe".[48]

White argued that the traditional "imperial adventure" historiography where the fur trade was the work of a few courageous white men who ventured into the wildness was flawed as it ignored the contributions of the Indians. The American anthropologist Ruth Landes in her 1937 book Ojibwe Women described Ojibwe society in the 1930s as based on "male supremacy", and she assumed this was how Ojibwe society had always been, a conclusion that has been widely followed.[50] Landes did note that the women she interviewed told her stories about Ojibwe women who in centuries past inspired by their dream visions had played prominent roles as warriors, hunters, healers, traders and leaders.[50]

In 1978, the American anthropologist Eleanor Leacock who writing from a Marxist perspective in her article "Women's Status In Egalitarian Society" challenged Landes by arguing that Ojibwe society had in fact been egalitarian, but the fur trade had changed the dynamics of Ojibwe society from a simple barter economy to one where men could become powerful by having access to European goods, and this had led to the marginalization of Ojibwe women.[50]

More recently, the American anthropologist Carol Devens in her 1992 book Countering Colonization: Native American Women and the Great Lakes Missions 1630–1900 followed Leacock by arguing that exposure to the patriarchal values of ancien regime France together with the ability to collect "surplus goods" made possible by the fur trade had turned the egalitarian Ojibwe society into unequal society where women did not count for much.[51] White wrote that an examination of the contemporary sources would suggest the fur trade had in fact empowered and strengthened the role of Ojibwe women who played a very important role in the fur trade, and it was the decline of the fur trade which had led to the decline of status of Ojibwe women.[52]

By contrast, the fur trade seems to have weakened the status of Indian women in the Canadian sub-arctic in what is now the North West Territories, the Yukon, and the northern parts of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta. The harsh terrain imposed a nomadic or semi-nomadic lifestyle on the people living there as to stay in one place for long would quickly exhaust the food supply. The Indians living in the sub-arctic had only small dogs incapable of carrying heavy loads with one fur trader in 1867 calling Gwich'in dogs "miserable creatures no smaller than foxes" while another noted "dogs were scare and burdens were supported by people's backs".[53] The absence of navigable rivers made riparian transport impossible, so everything had to be carried on the backs of the women.[54]

There was a belief among the Northern Athabaskan peoples that weapons could be only handled by men, and that for a weapon to be used by a woman would cause it to lose its effectiveness; as relations between the various bands were hostile, during travel, men were always armed while the women carried all of the baggage.[53] All of the Indian men living in the sub-arctic had an acute horror of menstrual blood, seen as an unclean substance that no men could ever touch, and as a symbol of a threatening femininity.[55]

The American anthropologist Richard J. Perry suggested that under the impact of the fur trade that certain misogynistic tendencies that were already long established among the Northern Athabaskan peoples became significantly worse.[55] Owing to the harsh terrain of the subarctic and the limited food supplies, the First Nations peoples living there had long practiced infanticide to limit their band sizes, as a large population would starve.[56] One fur trader in the 19th century noted that within the Gwich'in, newly born girls were far more likely to be victims of infanticide than boys, owing to the low status of women, adding that female infanticide was practiced to such an extent there was a shortage of women in their society.[56]

The Chipewyan began trading fur in exchange for metal tools and instruments with the Hudson's Bay Company in 1717, which caused a drastic change in their lifestyle, going from a people engage in daily subsidence activities to a people engaging in far-reaching trade as the Chipewyan become the middlemen between the Hudson's Bay Company and the other Indians living further inland.[57] The Chipewyan guarded their right to trade with the Hudson's Bay Company with considerable jealousy and prevented peoples living further inland like the Tłı̨chǫ and Yellowknives from crossing their territory to trade directly with the Hudson's Bay Company for the entire 18th century.[58]

For the Chipewyan, who were still living in the Stone Age, metal implements were greatly valued as it took hours to heat up a stone pot, but only minutes to heat up a metal pot, while an animal could be skinned far more efficiently and quickly with a metal knife than with a stone knife.[58] For many Chipewyan bands, involvement with the fur trade eroded their self-sufficiency as they killed animals for the fur trade, not food, which forced them into dependency on other bands for food, thus leading to a cycle where many Chipewyan bands came to depend trading furs for European goods, which were traded for food, and which caused them to make very long trips across the subarctic to Hudson's Bay and back.[58] To make these trips, the Chipewyan traveled though barren terrain that was so devoid of life that starvation was a real threat, during which the women had to carry all of the supplies.[59] Samuel Hearne of the Hudson's Bay Company who was sent inland in 1768 to establish contact with the "Far Indians" as the company called them, wrote about the Chipewyan:

"Their annual haunts, in the quest for furrs [furs], is so remote from European settlement, as to render them the greatest travelers in the known world; and as they have neither horse nor water carriage, every good hunter is under necessity of having several people to assist in carrying his furs to the company's Fort, as well as carrying back the European goods which he received in exchange for them. No persons in this country are so proper for this work as the women, because they are inured to carry and haul heavy loads from their childhood and to do all manner of drudgery".[60]

Hearne's chief guide Matonabbee told him that women had to carry everything with them on their long trips across the sub-arctic because "...when all the men are heavy laden, they can neither hunt nor travel any considerable distance".[61] Perry cautioned that when Hearne traveled though the sub-arctic in 1768–1772, the Chipewyan had been trading with the Hudson's Bay Company directly since 1717, and indirectly via the Cree for at least the last 90 years, so the life-styles he observed among the Chipewyan had been altered by the fur trade, and in no way can be considered a pre-contact life style.[62] But Perry argued that the arduous nature of these trips across the sub-arctic together with the burden of carrying everything suggests that the Chipewyan women did not voluntarily submit to this regime, which would suggest that even in the pre-contact period that Chipewyan women had a low status.[61]

When fur traders first contacted the Gwich'in in 1810 when they founded Fort Good Hope on the Mackenzie river, accounts describe a more or less egalitarian society, but the impact of the fur trade lowered the status of Gwich'in women.[63] Accounts by the fur traders in the 1860s describe Gwich'in women as essentially slaves, carrying the baggage on their long journeys across the sub-arctic.[61]

One fur trader wrote about the Gwich'in women that they were "little better than slaves" while another fur trader wrote about the "brutal treatment" that Gwich'in women suffered at the hands of their men.[56] Gwich'in band leaders who became rich by First Nations standards by engaging in the fur trade tended to have several wives, and indeed tended to monopolize the women in their bands. This caused serious social tensions, as Gwich'in young men found it impossible to have a mate, as their leaders took all of the women for themselves.[64]

Significantly, the establishment of fur trading posts inland by the Hudson's Bay Company in the late 19th century led to an improvement in the status of Gwich'in women as anyone could obtain European goods by trading at the local HBC post, ending the ability of Gwich'in leaders to monopolize the distribution of European goods while the introduction of dogs capable of carrying sleds meant their women no longer had to carry everything on their long trips.[65]

On the Pacific coast of North America, the fur trade mainly pursued seal and sea otter.[67] In northern areas, this trade was established first by the Russian-American Company, with later participation by Spanish/Mexican, British, and U.S. hunters/traders. Non-Russians extended fur-hunting areas south as far as the Baja California Peninsula.

Starting in the mid-16th century, Europeans traded weapons and household goods in exchange for furs with Native Americans in southeast America.[68] The trade originally tried to mimic the fur trade in the north, with large quantities of wildcats, bears, beavers, and other fur bearing animals being traded.[69] The trade in fur coat animals decreased in the early 18th century, curtailed by the rising popularity of trade in deerskins.[69] The deerskin trade went onto dominate the relationships between the Native Americans of the southeast and the European settlers there. Deerskin was a highly valued commodity due to the deer shortage in Europe, and the British leather industry needed deerskins to produce goods.[70] The bulk of deerskins were exported to Great Britain during the peak of the deerskin trade.[71]

Native American—specifically the Creek's—beliefs revolved around respecting the environment. The Creek believed they had a unique relationship with the animals they hunted.[70] The Creek had several rules surround how a hunt could occur, particularly prohibiting needless killing of deer.[70]

There were specific taboos against taking the skins of unhealthy deer.[70] But the lucrative deerskin trade prompted hunters to act past the point of restraint they had operated under before.[70] The hunting economy collapsed due to the scarcity of deer as they were over-hunted and lost their lands to white settlers.[70] Due to the decline of deer populations, and the governmental pressure to switch to the colonists' way of life, animal husbandry replaced deer hunting both as an income and in the diet.[72]

Rum was first introduced in the early 1700s as a trading item, and quickly became an inelastic good.[73] While Native Americans were for the most part acted conservatively in trading deals, they consumed a surplus of alcohol.[70] Traders used rum to help form partnerships.[73]

Rum had a significant effect on the social behavior of Native Americans. Under the influence of rum, the younger generation did not obey the elders of the tribe, and became involved with more skirmishes with other tribes and white settlers.[70] Rum also disrupted the amount of time the younger generation of males spent on labor.[73] Alcohol was one of the goods provided on credit, and led to a debt trap for many Native Americans.[73] Native Americans did not know how to distill alcohol, and thus were driven to trade for it.[70]

Native Americans had become dependent on manufactured goods such as guns and domesticated animals, and lost much of their traditional practices. With the new cattle herds roaming the hunting lands, and a greater emphasis on farming due to the invention of the Cotton Gin, Native Americans struggled to maintain their place in the economy.[72] An inequality gap had appeared in the tribes, as some hunters were more successful than others.[70]

Still, the creditors treated an individual's debt as debt of the whole tribe, and used several strategies to keep the Native Americans in debt.[73] Traders would rig the weighing system that determined the value of the deerskins in their favor, cut measurement tools to devalue the deerskin, and would tamper with the manufactured goods to decrease their worth, such as watering down the alcohol they traded.[73] To satisfy the need for deerskins, many males of the tribes abandoned their traditional seasonal roles and became full-time traders.[73] When the deerskin trade collapsed, Native Americans found themselves dependent on manufactured goods, and could not return to the old ways due to lost knowledge.[73]

Spanish exploratory parties in the 1500s had violent encounters with the powerful chiefdoms, which led to the decentralization of the indigenous people in the southeast.[74] Almost a century passed between the original Spanish exploration and the next wave of European immigration,[74] which allowed the survivors of the European diseases to organize into new tribes.[75]

Most Spanish trade was limited with Indians on the coast until expeditions inland in the beginning of the 17th century.[68] By 1639, substantial trade between the Spanish in Florida and the Native Americans for deerskins developed, with more interior tribes incorporated into the system by 1647.[68] Many tribes throughout the southeast began to send trading parties to meet with the Spanish in Florida, or used other tribes as middlemen to obtain manufactured goods.[68] The Apalachees used the Apalachiola people to collect deerskins, and in return the Apalachees would give them silver, guns, or horses.[68]

As the English and French colonizers ventured into the southeast, the deerskin trade experienced a boom going into the 18th century.[70] Many of the English colonists who settled in the Carolinas in the late 1600s came from Virginia, where trading patterns of European goods in exchange for beaver furs already had started.[76] The white-tailed deer herds that roamed south of Virginia were a more profitable resource.[70] The French and the English struggled for control over Southern Appalachia and the Mississippi Valley, and needed alliances with the Indians there to maintain dominance.[73] The European colonizers used the trade of deerskins for manufactured goods to secure trade relationships, and therefore power.[69]

At the beginning of the 18th century, more organized violence than in previous decades occurred between the Native Americans involved in the deerskin trade and white settlers, most famously the Yamasee War. This uprising of Indians against fur traders almost wiped out the European colonists in the southeast.[73] The British promoted competition between tribes, and sold guns to both Creeks and Cherokees. This competition sprang out of the slave demand in the southeast – tribes would raid each other and sell prisoners into the slave trade of the colonizers.[73]

France tried to outlaw these raids because their allies, the Choctaws, Chickasaws, and Yazoos, bore the brunt of the slave trade.[73] Guns and other modern weapons were essential trading items for the Native Americans to protect themselves from slave raids; motivation which drove the intensity of the deerskin trade.[70][77] The need for Indian slaves decreased as African slaves began to be imported in larger quantities, and the focus returned to deerskins.[73] The drive for Indian slaves also was diminished after the Yamasee War to avoid future uprisings.[77]

The Yamasees had collected extensive debt in the first decade of the 1700s due to buying manufactured goods on credit from traders, and then not being able to produce enough deerskins to pay the debt later in the year.[78] Indians who were not able to pay their debt were often enslaved.[78] The practice of enslavement extended to the wives and children of the Yamasees in debt as well.[79]

This process frustrated the Yamasees and other tribes, who lodged complaints against the deceitful credit-loaning scheme traders had enforced, along with methods of cheating or trade.[78] The Yamasees were a coastal tribe in the area that is now known as South Carolina, and most of the white-tailed deer herds had moved inland for the better environment.[78] The Yamasees rose up against the English in South Carolina, and soon other tribes joined them, creating combatants from almost every nation in the South.[69][76] The British were able to defeat the Indian coalition with help from the Cherokees, cementing a pre-existing trade partnership.[76]

After the uprisings, the Native Americans returned to making alliances with the European powers, using political savvy to get the best deals by playing the three nations off each other.[76] The Creeks were particularly good at manipulation – they had begun trading with South Carolina in the last years of the 17th century and became a trusted deerskin provider.[78] The Creeks were already a wealthy tribe due to their control over the most valuable hunting lands, especially when compared to the impoverished Cherokees.[76] Due to allying with the British during the Yamasee War, the Cherokees lacked Indian trading partners and could not break with Britain to negotiate with France or Spain.[76]

From their bases in the Great Lakes area, the French steadily pushed their way down the Mississippi river valley to the Gulf of Mexico from 1682 onward.[80] Initially, French relations with the Natchez Indians were friendly and in 1716 the French were allowed to establish Fort Rosalie (modern Natchez, Mississippi) on the Natchez territory.[80] In 1729, following several cases of French land fraud, the Natchez burned down Fort Rosalie and killed about 200 French settlers.[81]

In response, the French together with their allies, the Choctaw, waged a near-genocidal campaign against the Natchez as French and Choctaw set out to eliminate the Natchez as a people with the French often burning alive all of the Natchez they captured.[81] Following the French victory over the Natchez in 1731 which resulted in the destruction of the Natchez people, the French were able to begin fur trading down the Arkansas river and greatly expanded the Arkansas Post to take advantage of the fur trade.[81]

Deerskin trade was at its most profitable in the mid-18th century.[72] The Creeks rose up as the largest deerskin supplier, and the increase in supply only intensified European demand for deerskins.[72] Native Americans continued to negotiate the most lucrative trade deals by forcing England, France, and Spain to compete for their supply of deerskins.[72] In the 1750s and 1760s, the Seven Years' War disrupted France's ability to provide manufactures goods to its allies, the Choctaws and Chickasaw.[76] The French and Indian War further disrupted trade, as the British blockaded French goods.[76] The Cherokees allied themselves with France, who were driven out from the southeast in accordance with the Treaty of Paris in 1763.[76] The British were now the dominant trading power in the southeast.

While both the Cherokee and the Creek were the main trading partners of the British, their relationships with the British were different. The Creeks adapted to the new economic trade system, and managed to hold onto their old social structures.[70] Originally Cherokee land was divided into five districts but the number soon grew to thirteen districts with 200 hunters assigned per district due to deerskin demand.[73]

Charleston and Savannah were the main trading ports for the export of deerskins.[73] Deerskins became the most popular export, and monetarily supported the colonies with the revenue produced by taxes on deerskins.[73] Charleston's trade was regulated by the Indian Trade Commission, composed of traders who monopolized the market and profited off the sale of deerskins.[73] From the beginning of the 18th century to mid-century, the deerskin exports of Charleston more than doubled in exports.[70] Charleston received tobacco and sugar from the West Indies and rum from the North in exchange for deerskins.[73] In return for deerskins, Great Britain sent woolens, guns, ammunition, iron tools, clothing, and other manufactured goods that were traded to the Native Americans.[73]

The Revolutionary War disrupted the deerskin trade, as the import of British manufactured goods with cut off.[70] The deerskin trade had already begun to decline due to over-hunting of deer.[78] The lack of trade caused the Native Americans to run out of items, such as guns, on which they depended.[70] Some Indians, such as the Creeks, tried to reestablish trade with the Spanish in Florida, where some loyalists were hiding as well.[70][76]

When the war ended with the British retreating, many tribes who had fought on their side were now left unprotected and now had to make peace and new trading deals with the new country.[76] Many Native Americans were subject to violence from the new Americans who sought to settle their territory.[82] The new American government negotiated treaties that recognized prewar borders, such as those with the Choctaw and Chickasaw, and allowed open trade.[82]

In the two decades following the Revolutionary War, the United States' government established new treaties with the Native Americans the provided hunting grounds and terms of trade.[70] But the value of deerskins dropped as domesticated cattle took over the market, and many tribes soon found themselves in debt.[70][72] The Creeks began to sell their land to the government to try and pay their debts, and infighting among the Indians made it easy for white settlers to encroach upon their lands.[70] The government also sought to encourage Native Americans to give up their old ways of subsistence hunting, and turn to farming and domesticated cattle for trade.[72]

As men from the old fur trade in the Northeast made the trek west in the early nineteenth century, they sought to recreate the economic system from which they had profited in the Northeast. Some men went alone but others relied on companies like the Hudson Bay Company and the Missouri Fur Company. Marriage and kinship with native women would play an important role in the western fur trade. White traders who moved west needed to establish themselves in the kinship networks of the tribes, and they often did this by marrying a prominent Indian woman. This practice was called a "country" marriage and allowed the trader to network with the adult male members of the woman's band, who were necessary allies for trade.[88] The children of these unions, who were known as Métis, were an integral part of the fur trade system.

The Métis label defined these children as a marginal people with a fluid identity.[89] Early on in the fur trade, Métis were not defined by their racial category, but rather by the way of life they chose. These children were generally the offspring of white men and Native mothers and were often raised to follow the mother's lifestyle. The father could influence the enculturation process and prevent the child from being classified as Métis[90] in the early years of the western fur trade. Fur families often included displaced native women who lived near forts and formed networks among themselves. These networks helped to create kinship between tribes which benefitted the traders. Catholics tried their best to validate these unions through marriages. But missionaries and priests often had trouble categorizing the women, especially when establishing tribal identity.[91]

Métis were among the first groups of fur traders who came from the Northeast. These men were mostly of a mixed race identity, largely Iroquois, as well as other tribes from the Ohio country.[92] Rather than one tribal identity, many of these Métis had multiple Indian heritages.[93] Lewis and Clark, who opened up the market on the fur trade in the Upper Missouri, brought with them many Métis to serve as engagés. These same Métis would become involved in the early western fur trade. Many of them settled on the Missouri River and married into the tribes there before setting up their trade networks.[94] The first generation of Métis born in the West grew up out of the old fur trade and provided a bridge to the new western empire.[95] These Métis possessed both native and European skills, spoke multiple languages, and had the important kinship networks required for trade.[96] In addition, many spoke the Michif Métis dialect. In an effort to distinguish themselves from natives, many Métis strongly associated with Roman Catholic beliefs and avoided participating in native ceremonies.[97]

By the 1820s, the fur trade had expanded into the Rocky Mountains where American and British interests begin to compete for control of the lucrative trade. The Métis would play a key role in this competition. The early Métis congregated around trading posts where they were employed as packers, laborers, or boatmen. Through their efforts they helped to create a new order centered on the trading posts.[98] Other Métis traveled with the trapping brigades in a loose business arrangement where authority was taken lightly and independence was encouraged. By the 1830s Canadians and Americans were venturing into the West to secure a new fur supply. Companies like the NWC and the HBC provided employment opportunities for Métis. By the end of the 19th century, many companies considered the Métis to be Indian in their identity. As a result, many Métis left the companies in order to pursue freelance work.[99]

After 1815 the demand for bison robes began to rise gradually, although the beaver still remained the primary trade item. The 1840s saw a rise in the bison trade as the beaver trade begin to decline.[100] Many Métis adapted to this new economic opportunity. This change of trade item made it harder for Métis to operate within companies like the HBC, but this made them welcome allies of the Americans who wanted to push the British to the Canada–US border. Although the Métis would initially operate on both sides of the border, by the 1850s they were forced to pick an identity and settle either north or south of the border. The period of the 1850s was thus one of migration for the Métis, many of whom drifted and established new communities or settled within existing Canadian, American or Indian communities.[101]

A group of Métis who identified with the Chippewa moved to the Pembina in 1819 and then to the Red River area in 1820, which was located near St. François Xavier in Manitoba. In this region they would establish several prominent fur trading communities. These communities had ties to one another through the NWC. This relationship dated back to between 1804 and 1821 when Métis men had served as low level voyageurs, guides, interpreters, and contre-maitres, or foremen. It was from these communities that Métis buffalo hunters operating in the robe trade arose.

The Métis would establish a whole economic system around the bison trade. Whole Métis families were involved in the production of robes, which was the driving force of the winter hunt. In addition, they sold pemmican at the posts.[102] Unlike Indians, the Métis were dependent on the fur trade system and subject to the market. The international prices of bison robes were directly influential on the well-being of Métis communities. By contrast, the local Indians had a more diverse resource base and were less dependent on Americans and Europeans at this time.

By the 1850s the fur trade had expanded across the Great Plains, and the bison robe trade began to decline. The Métis had a role in the depopulation of the bison. Like the Indians, the Métis had a preference for cows, which meant that the bison had trouble maintaining their herds.[103] In addition, flood, drought, early frost, and the environmental impact of settlement posed further threats to the herds. Traders, trappers, and hunters all depended on the bison to sustain their way of life. The Métis tried to maintain their lifestyle through a variety of means. For instance, they often used two wheel carts made from local materials, which meant that they were more mobile than Indians and thus were not dependent on following seasonal hunting patterns.[104]

The 1870s brought an end to the bison presence in the Red River area. Métis communities like those at Red River or Turtle Mountain were forced to relocate to Canada and Montana. An area of resettlement was the Judith Basin in Montana, which still had a population of bison surviving in the early 1880s. By the end of decade the bison were gone, and Métis hunters relocated back to tribal lands. They wanted to take part in treaty negotiations in the 1880s, but they had questionable status with tribes such as the Chippewa.[105]

Many former Métis bison hunters tried to get land claims during the treaty negotiations in 1879–1880. They were reduced to squatting on Indian land during this time and collecting bison bones for $15–20 a ton in order to purchase supplies for the winter. The reservation system did not ensure that the Métis were protected and accepted as Indians. To further complicate matters, Métis had a questionable status as citizens and were often deemed incompetent to give court testimonies and denied the right to vote.[106] The end of the bison robe trade was the end of the fur trade for many Métis. This meant that they had to reestablish their identity and adapt to a new economic world.