Definition of Empire and Dependency Theory

During lecture this week we learned that the Osage were able to develop a very large trade network by obtaining modern weapons and learning how to use them effectively. They dominated the area from the west bank of the Mississippi river to the Pueblo lands in New Mexico. I found this very interesting because that is a very large area (maybe larger than the area that the Spanish controlled) and I had not previous learned about it. We always hear about the French and British empires and their influence in North America, but to me if the Osage dominated that much land, then they too should be considered some sort of empire. This is probably another example of history being dictated by European influences.

This past week we also learned that classical Dependency Theory does not hold up to a thorough examination of history. Dependency theory states that Native Americans became dependent on European goods and this eventually led to the Europeans powers becoming dominant in North America and Native Americans losing their culture. If we remember that the Spanish, French, and English all had different views of religous conversion (that were not that sucessful) and that trade was not a one-way street from Europe to North American, then Dependency Theory does not hold up. I also don't believe in Dependency Theory because Native Americans already had advanced aspects of their culture (crop-rotation) before Europeans began trading with them for beaver furs.