U & D

We non-Native teachers know, and tell other teachers, that the best way to respond to LD 291 is to let the Passamaquoddy, Penobscot, Maliseet and Mi’kmaq educators and individuals speak for themselves. Unfortunately, until a “speakers’ bureau” or a digital video resource becomes reality, this is almost impossible for most schools.

So when I had to opportunity to have a member of the Mohawk Nation speak to my students for no fee, I grabbed it. This was arranged, as many great opportunities are, through coincidence. Our speaker, Chuck Barnett (I do not have his Mohawk name, for which I am very sorry – will get it and upgrade this post), lived in Freeport during Middle and High School school years, and he is a classmate of a member of our faculty. In fact, he sat in our classroom the first year it was built.

As any middle school teacher knows, first impressions matter. Chuck arrived with an elaborate 3-feathered headdress, a war club, a wampum belt, and laptop. Many students were stunned that he was wearing a stylish dark suit (no tie) – a few thought it was a tux. His head was shaved – why?

Chuck is an Iroquois language speaker and began his talk with a Mohawk welcome, a thank you to us for welcoming him. His talk was about his traditional culture, worldview and values, especially the importance of language. Like the Passamaquoddy elders whom I have heard speak, he is sensitive to the profound differences between English and his language. He communicated this to our students cleverly – Mohawk is a language with “syllable-built” words; Chuck showed students how “people” breaks into “pee + pull” (pullers of pee ??) – no syllable sense there. The students got his point quickly, and when he then explained that the Mohawk call themselves the spirit become real, the message was a powerful one. Students were very attentive to the relationship between naming and the function or description of what was named. I kicked myself for not purchasing the poster Naming Places – the Penobscot Way and for not spending more time with the Passamaquoddy interactive CD Landscapes, Legends and Language of the Passamaquoddy People.

Equally powerful were his explanations of the long house, farming with the 3 sisters (he did not use this phrase, however), the grieving process (his role in his clan is to be the offerer of condolences), and the structure of a matrilineal, matrilocal, matriarchal clan. Girl students were, of course, especially interested in this last.

Most interesting to me were Chuck’s explanations of some historical events and the origins of some widely-used words.

I asked about the animosity between the Mohawk and the more eastern nations. He talked about the origin of “Mohawk” – it is a Narragansett derisive name meaning, basically, cannibals. Yes, Chuck explained, the Mohawk practiced ritual cannibalism after a successful battle. Which led to the dual-nature of the Mohawk: a peaceful, settled farming people who were a “level two” member of the Iroquois Confederation; and also a warlike people who were never defeated in battle and who would do battle when necessary (the definition of necessary being quite broad). He did not claim that the Mohawk attempted to remain neutral in the Revolutionary or other wars, nor did he apologize for violence, alliances or war. We will talk next week about this aspect of Mohawk worldview is not unlike our country’s, but quite unlike that of Maine’s natives. We will also talk about the historical antipathy between the Iroquois and the Algonquian speaking nations. And their trade.

Chuck spoke right off the bat about the words tribe and nation. Tribe, he told the students, is a derogatory term implying a low level of civilization; it is an insult to call the Mohawk a tribe or a tribal culture. Our dictionary defines the word differently: “a social division in a traditional society consisting of families or communities linked by social, economic, religious, or blood ties, with a common culture and dialect, typically having a recognized leader” – this is a values-neutral, anthropological definition, with the possible exception of the words “traditional society.” My students are confused, especially as the Passamaquoddy use the term Tribe in their websites.

What should a teacher do? Say Passamaquoddy – not Passamaquoddy Tribe. Or use the word nation.

As for nation, Chuck shared the definition also found in our student dictionaries: “a large aggregate of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular country or territory.” When you think about it, as he asked the students to do, the USA is not a nation – we do not share a common descent. Nor is Canada (Chuck lives in the Kahnawake Mohawk Territory). But the Mohawk are a nation. We have to talk more about this in class. If we are not a nation, what are we? If the Maliseet are a nation, what does that mean? So what is the Aroostook Band?

Which will return us to a discussion of the key term, sovereignty.

Last, Chuck made the point in each of his three talks to clarify for students the origin of the word Indian, a word that he finds insulting. He told students that the “Columbus’ mistake” origin of the word is not true. To remind you, this “mistake” is that Columbus thought he had arrived in India, one of his destinations.

The truth, according to Chuck, is that Columbus kept two journals on his first voyage. In the journal for Queen Isabella, he talked of his gold and other take-aways. In his private journal, he spoke of the natives he encountered as “in Dios” – or “people of God.” India, the nation, was called Hindustan in 1492 – Columbus could not even have known the word.

My students were very impressed by this mistake in their history books, especially my Mi’kmaq student. Some, including me, were unsettled by such a large revision. So I did, as Chuck himself suggested, “Google it out.”

The only accurate source I can find for the “in Dios” story is this blog that cites comedian George Carlin as the originator of the “in Dios” story. He is not a reliable source, unfortunately, especially in light of the linguisitic evidence for the place name “India” (in some form), and the evidence of Columbus’ journals themselves, which make it clear that he was seeking the “Indies” (the journals are in English, but Columbus spoke Spanish, Latin, Italian, Portuguese and probably a local dialect as well – he would have heard and read about “India” and the even more desirable “Indies.”

So what is a teacher to do about a guest speaker who misteaches? Should we doubt his claims about Mohawk desire for peace? His claim that the Native foot bones (and gait) have evolved differently for stalking (somewhat pigeon-toed, rolling from the outside in)? The story told by his wampum belt? Should we wonder if Mohawk men did, in fact, shave their heads help with the bug problem?

Should we listen critically and doubtfully to Native speakers?

No. I will show the students the evidence I have found above about Columbus, and then remind them of the powerful worldview message they heard about language and words; the powerful historical messages about the Iroquois Confederacy, Indian Schools, land ownership, genocide, and voting rights; and the powerful cultural messages about different ways to structure family, community, the responsibilities of the individual within each, and the power of time and place in the Mohawk. I will remind them that Chuck introduces both himself and the seven generations of family when he wears his diplomatic headdress. I may tell them something I learned from a colleague who taught Chuck 20 years ago: his head was originally shaved in support for the daughter of another colleague who is battling aggressive cancer. I guess that he continues to shave it because he values looking, well, Mohawk.

Outside speakers open a door to the outside – we have to let that happen!

Let’s get working on a Maine Native Studies speakers’ bureau. Or on a collection of short video interview with Elders, active adults, and students. Bring it in!