Main Page🔒 SSL Verified

Table of Contents

• ↓ Contexts and Frameworks
• ↓ Treaty Pages
• ↓ Navigation menu
• ↓ Top Alternatives to mappinglandtheft.ca

6-Month Traffic Trend Estimate

Visual representation extracted from mappinglandtheft.ca

Content Snippets from mappinglandtheft.ca

"Welcome to the wiki-environment for Mapping Land Theft - An interactive map showing Crown lands expansion during the years 1680-1903 as published by the Department of Indian Affairs Canada in the Indian Treaties and Surrenders volumes I & II (1680-1890)[1] and volume III (1890-1903)[2]. These volumes, published in the years 1905 and 1912 respectively, contain original documents describing land treaties and surrenders between the Crown and First Nations. The map is a spatial-historical inquiry into the land dispensation in Canada: a mapping of Indigenous lands and of the myriad ways – from consent to coercion and theft - that these lands were transferred to Canada. It is a spatial accounting of Canada's historical colonial behaviour. Using the dates of each treaty and land surrender and an interactive timeseries application, the map animates the progression of Crown expansion in a format inspired by Saunt's (2014)[3] Interactive Map of the Loss of Indian Land in the US."

"Mapping Land Theft is a collaborative project that hopes to build a community of contributors to complete the map, transcribe the documents, and continue to build this Wiki environment with further analyses. See the How to Contribute page to learn more."

"The “colonial relationship” can be understood in spatial terms, in which maps have a special role. Pasternak (2017: 22)[4] writes that “settler states claim authority through taking up Indigenous space”.  Goeman (2013: 18)[5] discusses how “maps exert political control by manipulating the representation of space into a language of normativity.” To Goeman, the map objects made by colonial states and the mapping processes are instruments of power: “The development of modern nation-states depended on sending out official mapmaking expeditions as a state tool to find information that would enable the assertion of political force over territories and all contained within.” Goeman also points out that “these colonial maps were instrumental in treaty making and creating national boundaries; they are still used to regulate and determine spatial practices. Dispute of these maps was not uncommon, and tribal leaders would often draw on their own geographical interpretations to dispute the treaties. Native scholars, researchers, and mapmakers who now have more access to the archive are also using maps and documents as sources for land reclamation.”"

"Thus one arena of conflict between colonial power and Indigenous peoples is the map (Oliver 2011[6], Sparke 1998[7]). Brealey (1995)[8] described the 'cartographic encirclement' of the first nations in BC from 1793-1916, by which maps served to “inscribe and transmit the terms of reference” for a politics of displacement of Indigenous peoples. Bryan and Wood (2015: 74)[9] take up the now infamous assertion by Nietschmann that “more Indigenous territory has been claimed by maps than by guns. This assertion has its corollary: more Indigenous territory can be reclaimed and defended by maps than by guns.” Disputing Nietschmann, they argue that the map cannot have “transcendent outcomes”. They believe that it can “provide instead a distinct way of seeing the world and aligning the forces needed to conform reality with maps.” For colonial power, Bryan and Wood argue, “It's about maps and guns. It's about weaponizing the map.”"

Key Topics & Focus Areas for mappinglandtheft.ca:

Contexts and Frameworks

Treaty Pages

Navigation menu