Waawiyatanong Resists
By: Detroit Democratic Socialists Of America
Tags: Thanksgiving, Socialism, Indigenous, Imperialism, Detroit

by Joanne Coutts

Kitichigumi Region map by the author

Where are we at? On this third Thursday in November let us take a moment to remember that we are on stolen land.

This place that we now call Detroit has many names. By the Wendat it is known as Karontaen (coast of the straits), Iroquoian speakers refer to it as Teuchsa Grondie (place of many beavers) and in Algonquin it has two names, Yondotega (the great village) and Waawiyatanong (the crooked way).

The idea that Detroit must be defined by fixed borders is a colonial concept. The land defense of Waawiyatanong took place across the geographic areas we now call Michigan, Indiana and Illinois.

Obwandiyag, Pokagon and Aubbeenaubee are probably not the first names that trip off your tongue when talking about Waawiyatanong’s storied history of resistance to colonialism. Their names and deeds are not taught in schools. As the resistance to white supremacy continues in Waawiyatanong, it is time to bring their successes and failures into the conversation, and to honor and learn from their struggle.

Obwandiyag and armed resistance

Obwandiyag (c. 1714/20 — April 20, 1769) was the son of an Odawa father and an Ojibwe mother. In 1763, to defend the land of his people, Obwandiyag built a coalition of Odawa, Ojibwe, Neshnabek, Wendat, Miami, Kickapoo, Piankashaw and Wea warriors to “exterminate from our land this nation which only seeks to destroy us…to stop the ways hither so that they may never come again.” 1

The concept of allied land defense did not originate with Obwandiyag. A plan for liberation from colonialist expansion had already been circulating throughout the Kitichigumi region. Devised by two O-non-dowa-gah chiefs, Tahaiadoris and Kiashuta, the plan called for a strategy of eliminating colonialist forces from Waawiyatanong, securing a border at the Allegheny Mountains and capturing the colonial forts of Presque Isle, Le Boeuf and Venango to cut communications lines and force the colonialists to surrender. 2

This plan was rejected at a conference of Ojibwe, Odawa, Neshnabek and Wendat chiefs and warriors at Waawiyatanong in 1762, but its spirit lived on in the teachings of the Lenape prophet, Neolin, who urged his listeners to give up European ways.

In April 1763, Obwandiyag received news from the Lenape “of the death of a [Lenape] chief at the hands of white people.” 3 This news and the accompanying war belt galvanized the local Waawiyatanong chiefs into action under his leadership.

Obwandiyag Resistance map by the author. Green = colonial fort successfully captured. Red = unsuccessful attempt to capture colonial fort. Purple = allies to support Obwandiyag’s blockade of Waawiyatanong.

Obwandiyag’s initial strategy to capture Waawiyatanong was betrayed to the colonial leaders inside the fort. Undeterred, he set up a blockade of more than 600 warriors around Waawiyatanong. From this base, his messengers flew across the country, carrying war belts to Sag-in-a-we, Deshkam Ziibi and Mich-i-nim-auk-in-ong. Widespread knowledge of the plan devised by Tahaiadoris and Kiashuta, meant that Obwandiyag could be confident that the chiefs in these places understood what was required of them.

Maintaining the blockade of Waawiyatanong limited Obwandiyag’s physical movement but not his influence. Using the extensive communications network that existed between Kitichigumi communities, he launched almost simultaneous attacks on colonial garrisons across the region. In quick succession St. Joseph’s fell to Neshnabek Chief, Ninivois. Forts Miami and Ouiatonon were taken by the Twightwee and an alliance of Kickapoo, Piankashaw and Wea respectively. Fort Sandusky fell to the Wendat. And Fort Michilimackinac was secured by Ojibwe chief, Menehwehna.

Further east, O-non-dowa-gah and Lenape forces took the invading forts at Presque Isle, La Boeuf, Ligonier and Venango.

By mid-summer 1763, only Forts Pitt, Niagara and Detroit remained in colonial hands. 4 From across the Kitichigumi, chiefs rallied to Obwandiyag’s call, arriving at Waawiyatanong with hundreds of warriors.

The river represented the biggest obstacle to colonial surrender. As long as ships could navigate the river to resupply the garrison, it could continue to maintain its attacking foothold on the land. The allied forces defended the river against incursion by colonial ships. The colonialists first attempt to resupply failed when the ship, Michigan, ran aground near Catfish Creek and Obwandiyag’s warriors killed and captured colonial reinforcements who made it to the riverbank. The second attempt, with the schooner, Huron, resulted in a stalemate as a freak accident cut the Huron’s anchor sending it spinning around in the water, scattering the land defender’s canoes and exposing them to cannon fire. 5

The failure to capture the Huron was both a physical and psychological setback for the allies. They still did not control the river and a line of resupply remained open to the colonial garrison. Summer was starting to turn to fall and the long blockade was taking its toll on Obwandiyag’s forces. Warriors began to leave, pulled to their homes by the need to go hunting to feed their families for the winter. Disheartening news of the Lenape’s inability to shut down colonial lines of communication or dislodge the garrisons at Forts Pitt and Niagara ran through the camp. Other news of peace between the different colonialist factions suggested that the blockade at Waawiyatanong might continue indefinitely. No-one knew how close they were to success. The colonialists at Waawiyatanong had just two weeks of supplies left.

Aubbeenaubee and political resistance

“You have often asked us for land, which we have sold you. The foolish have sold you more than they ought. You now ask us for more land. The land on which we now live, we require for our subsistence, and our conclusion is…not to sell you any more. That is all we have to say to you.” 6

At the 1826 negotiation of the Wabash Treaty regarding the construction of the Michigan Road, Neshnabek Chief Aubbeenaubee let the colonial representatives know exactly where he and his people stood on the question of ceding more land to the colonial government.

His views were echoed by Miami Chief, Legros, “You have told us to think a great deal of our land, and not to dispose of it, and that we should live by each other, like brothers and sell and exchange our property as we choose. That is what we wish to do…we do not wish to sell our land.” 7

Pokagon Aubbeenaubee and the Michigan Road map by the author

While the Aubbeenaubee and Legros had very good reasons for not selling land for the road, they also had an interest in allowing the road to be built. Settler colonialism had become more and more widespread in Michigan and Indiana. The proliferation of private property gained by settlers through land grabs and land purchases had made communication between their communities more difficult. It had created unnatural borders that disrupted long used natural travel routes and isolated villages. Building the road would facilitate communications and trade and help separated communities unite to resist the ever present threat of removal to the west.

Rather than sell the land, the Chiefs agreed to rent “a strip of land 100 feet wide for [the Michigan Road] and also, one section of good land contiguous to the said road, for each mile of the same” for an annuity of $100 for every man, woman and child in their communities for 22 years. 8

It will come as no surprise to anyone with even a cursory knowledge of colonial history that the local colonial government broke the Treaty of Wabash almost immediately. They surveyed and tried to claim land well beyond that defined by the Treaty.

The allied Neshnabek Chiefs responded by appealing to an unlikely source of support, the federal government. Their grievances were heard and addressed. Local Neshnabek, accompanied by federal agents took control of overseeing the Michigan Road development. 9

By the time the Michigan Road actually reached Michigan federal policy had changed. The new colonial leaders passed the “Indian Removal Act” in 1830 and began deploying state militia to forcibly remove the Neshnabek from their land. Aubbeenaubee’s community was targeted and forced to march west at gunpoint. Some Neshnabek were able to escape removal. Paralleling another north bound road to freedom, the Michigan Road, because of Aubbeenaubee and others insistence on its strategic route connecting their communities, served as a way for people to navigate northward to the relative safety of Pokagon’s community.

Pokagon and religious resistance

Leopold Pokagon (c.1775 to 1841) was a true Anishnaabe. 10 His parents are believed to be have been Ojibwe and Odawa. While still a child, he was captured, adopted and raised by the Neshnabek leader, Topinabee. On the death of his adopted father in 1826, Pokagon was selected to lead the Neshnabek of the Senajowan zibe valley.

As Pokagon ascended to a position of leadership in his community, the colonial government had begun the removal of the Neshnabek to land west of the Mississippi River under the 1830 “Indian Removal Act.” Many Neshnabek were conned and captured by colonial militia and forced to march westward. Chief Menominee and his people of the Neshnabek community at Twin Lakes, in present day Indiana, were lured to the local church with promises of gifts, surrounded by armed militia, and marched towards Kansas under threat of violence, on what became known as the “Potawatomi Trail of Death.”

Aware of the imminent danger, Pokagon acted to prevent the removal of his community from their land. He understood that the colonial government viewed organized Christian religion as a symbol of their “civilization.” Pokagon traveled to Waawiyatanong in July 1830 to request the services of a Catholic priest for his community. The request was granted, Pokagon was baptized, and a priest was sent to establish a mission on the Senajowan zibe. This created a spiritual, and more importantly, political alliance for Pokagon and his band of Neshnabek.

In 1833, Pokagon and other Kitichigumi chiefs were summoned to Chicago for “treaty talks.” Treaties gave colonial land grabs a veil of respectability by forcing the local chiefs to sign over their lands for nominal sums before the onset of the violence of removal. Through rejecting the copious offerings of liquor and demonstrating his commitment to Catholicism, Pokagon was able to negotiate for his people to stay on their land.

Despite this victory, Neshnabek future in Michigan remained insecure. Pokagon again played the colonialists at their own game. He purchased land near present day Dowagiac for his people, and other Neshnabek bands, to live on.

Still the colonialists continued to persecute him, sending an army to try again to force Pokagon onto the Trail of Death. Still he persevered, this time turning to the law and the Michigan Supreme Court, which ruled that the colonial government could not force Pokagon off land that he had purchased.

Pokagon used colonial ideas, of religion and the sanctity of private property, and institutions to resist removal. For more than 150 years the colonial government “punished” Pokagon and his people by with-holding formal recognition. The rights of Neshnabek citizens of “Pokagon’s Band” were finally acknowledged on September 21, 1994.

Waawiyatanong Resists today

We use many of the same strategies of resistance today. We create alliances and coalitions. We build connecting “roads” on social media. We use colonial legal institutions to challenge white supremacist actors and actions. We search for spiritual and religious connections to each other. As we batten down the hatches of our individual forts in the face of COVID and the coming winter, I wonder how many Waawiyatanong residents are just 2 weeks away from joining us in the struggle.

I hope that in reading this you, the reader, will be inspired to do your own research, hold space for Indigenous narratives, and acknowledge that all our ongoing acts of resistance to white supremacy and colonialism take place on stolen land.

Authors Note

On writing: This has been a uncomfortable piece to write; uncomfortable for my heart as I grapple with telling a history of Waawiyatanong that is perhaps not mine to tell; for my head as I try to see familiar settler colonial geography through the lens of Ojibwe, Odawa and Neshnabek place names; and for my hands as I teach my fingers to type letters in unfamiliar sequences.

On language: The people of Kitichigumi had many names and many spellings for geographic locations. In the interests of clarity, I have followed the colonial concept of referring to specific places by only one name. I have tried to center the Ojibwe, Odawa and Neshnabek people by referring to individuals and communities by their names, and to de-center the French, British and US by lumping them all together as “the colonialists.”