May 2001
Musings on Northeastern Indian Identity
by Marge Bruchac
When a child is born, their ancestry is an accident of birth, over which they have no control. How they are represented to the world, is a product of choices that their parents make about what ethnicity to nurture and acknowledge. Sometimes, their skin color, hair, eyes, or body structure make that ethnicity obvious.
What each individual chooses to embrace of their cultural past is a product of what the ancestors pass on to them, what they learn in the course of their lives, and what abilities they have to express that learning. Whether they are recognized and accepted by other members of a particular cultural or ethnic group is a reflection of their abilities, interest, and enthusiasm to contribute to continuation of that culture.
Sadly, American Indian people in New England in the 20th century, especially northeastern Algonkian Indians, were faced by social issues that made it dangerous to identify as Indian. Having persisted despite centuries of colonial settlement, plagues, wars, and prejudice, they often faced the scorn and disapproval of white neighbors who expected all Indians to have been removed to reservations. White schoolchildren grew up hearing tales of frontier savagery, "last of the Indians," and similar motifs, and failed to recognize there were Native people still in New England. In the 1910s, the federal government, the Ku Klux Klan, white vigilantes, and eugenicists were actively hunting Indians in order to forcibly remove them to reservations, or, if that failed, to sterilize or kill them. The eugenicists, like Henry Perkins who ran the program for the state of Vermont, were also in steady correspondence with Hitler, who was doing the same to Jews, Poles, Gypsies, and even Czechoslovakians in Europe.
Any Indians who could be identified as "full-blood," (a concept that, incidentally, was invented by the US government, NOT by Native people) were in danger of being targeted for removal. Many Native people chose to keep a low profile, marry across ethnic and racial lines, or move to Canada, away from their traditional homelands, so that their children could survive.
Measuring Indian blood, and judging people because of it, is a racist practice that evolved from the US government's attempts to prevent racial mixing. Up until 1860 it was technically illegal for Indians to marry white Europeans, and so many mixed with black or Irish/Scottish. The Gaelic peoples were themselves not classified as "white" until they gained political power in Massachusetts in the late 19th century. In fact, they started the "Native American Party" also known as "The Know Nothings," in the 1850s to fight against the rights of people of color in New England. Those 19th century "Native Americans" advocated shipping all the blacks back to Africa and all the Indians out west, in order to keep "America" safe for real "Americans."
A curious thing about "white" Americans measuring blood to determine ethnic identity, is that the term "white" excluded many Europeans as well. Until after World War II, only British, Germanic, French, and northern Europeans were considered "white." Eastern and central Europeans, as well as Spanish, Italians, and others who looked a little darker-skinned, were targets of white prejudice.
When the first eastern European immigrants started arriving in America in the late 19th and early 20th century, they too were looked down on as marginal people, and there were social restrictions against marrying across those ethnic lines until after the war years, when men were scarce and there was an implied feeling of national unity. But if you ask the older eastern European immigrants, they'll tell you they were looked down on for their accents, the color of their skin, their culture and their religion. And then they turned around and judged their neighbors based on their ethnicity - some of those immigrants were astonishingly racist against Indians and Africans.
So how can Native American peoples in the northeast document their history? Are there records of all these historical details? Absolutely, with specifics of the regional histories, the eugenicists, the racial segregation laws as they affected Indians, and the parallel stories of other Indian families in the northeast. Are there written family genealogies? In too many cases, no, unless a family member was listed on a tribal register, fought in a war, went to college, bought a house, married, gave birth, and died, and identified their ethnicity in any of the above documents. Sometimes this happened, but more often the paper trail is spotty, and sometimes intentionally so. Many Indian families can provide oral histories, but cannot produce official papers.
Neither can the survivors of the Jewish concentration camps. Neither can the gypsies of Romania, or even the gypsies who live in England and Europe today. Neither can the hill folk, mixed with Indian and Scots-Irish who live in little enclaves in the Adirondacks. Neither can most Eastern European American immigrants.
It is a sad commentary on modern American identity, the general lack of ethnic tolerance and the myth of the vanishing Indian, that if a person claims Jewish ancestry, nobody asks any questions, and if someone claims black identity, nobody demands to know a percentage, but if a person claims Indian ancestry, someone is asking "How much?" and "Do you have proof?" Even now, as the US 2000 Census is underway, many Native people are hesitating about whether to put their identity on a piece of paper, for fear the government might come after them again. Imagine identifying yourself as an ethnic minority in Bosnia right now - get the idea?
American colonial powers have been trying to eliminate Indian cultures from the time of first contact. American rangers burned the early missions at Norridgewok, St. Francis/Odanak, and elsewhere, where written records of genealogies were first kept by the Jesuits. Indian families in the late 19th and early 20th centuries were variously identified by the census and their neighbors and themselves as black, red, mulatto, colored, or white, depending on who was asking. In every Indian family in New England today, there are still family members in hiding, and family members who actively deny any Indian identity out of reverse prejudice - they have tried so hard to just be white, they hate any family member who dares suggest differently.
So, how does one grow up so distant from an identity, and embrace it so fully as an adult. Why does a prominent figure like Madeleine Allbright take the risk of telling the world that she has just discovered she is actually Jewish? Claiming Abenaki identity does not entitle any one to casino benefits, government scholarships, or other programs, since the Abenaki, like two thirds of the tribes in the country, are not recognized by the federal government. No other ethnic group in the country, incidentally, is required to provide genealogical proof in order to qualify for government benefits or special scholarship programs. Claiming Indian identity, especially if an individual does not look stereotypically "Indian," does expose one to the scorn and ridicule of those who don't understand the history. So why do it? Is it playing Indian? Is it cashing in on a false identity?
No. Being Indian is not just about having papers and a tribal card. Some of the most verifiable "full-bloods" are not recognized by their own tribal groups. It has to do with being recognized by other tribal members, by tribal elders, and by other Indians as connected by blood ancestry, and by dedication and hard work committed to the task of passing on traditions and culture, even in the face of attacks, even at the risk of one's personal security. It has to do with deciding to contribute to the continuation of culture by learning about the past, preserving traditions, and teaching others to respect the history and traditions. It does not have to do with being spiteful or judgmental of other cultures or ethnicities, or of cutting others down because you believe differently, or of claiming the power to determine someone else's identity. It has to do with recovering what was lost because of fear and prejudice, and seeing to it that no one, of whatever ethnicity, has to hide a part of who or what they are because of the racism of their neighbors. That is the gift that we can give to each other, to our grandparents, to all the relatives who had to hide their Indian identity for fear of losing their freedom, their lives, and their families. This is how we get our revenge on their behalf - not by fighting a war, but by teaching people how to respect difference.
"Blood quantum" was the phrase eugenicists used to determine if someone should be sterilized, the phrase the Indian agents used to determine if someone should be forcibly removed to a reservation, and it was also the phrase that Hitler used - anyone with mixed blood was "impure" and should be eliminated to improve the purity of the white race. American Indian people never thought of their children, or themselves, in those terms.
It was traditional and routine practice, for generations before the Europeans arrived, to intermarry between tribal groups. When Europeans came to the Northeast, the Wabanaki, Wampanoag, and other coastal peoples selectively brought some of those people into their tribes, to improve social and trade relations. During the years of the French and Indian wars leading up to the American Revolution, and with the high risks of the whaling industry, there was a scarcity of Indian men in New England, and so there was a little more intermarriage with blacks, French, English, and Scots-Irish in those years. But in Indian communities, there were always people who took on or were given the task of preserving the traditions - a task that had more to do with natural abilities and willingness to carry the burden, than with "blood quantum." In the nineteenth century, with so many different forces in New England, a Native person might choose to be Methodist, Catholic, or pagan, might go to university or set up a hunting camp in the woods, might only speak English, or fluent French, English, and Indian, or might only speak Indian, might pass for black or white, or might even change their name and go live in Europe. Some individuals, as can be documented through some unique histories, might choose to do all of the above. But to be a carrier of tradition, one had to be accepted by other members of the tribe and other regional Indians. Without that acceptance, no amount of "blood quantum" or natural skill was worth a thing.
So it would be more honorable, and more accurate, for us to celebrate the ways in which northeastern Native peoples have adapted and survived, despite all the prejudice and social forces working against them, than to make any quick judgements based on minimal knowledge of an individual or family. Our ancestors know who we are. Never judge another person until you have walked in their moccasins, as my father was always fond of saying.
Wlibomkanni, travel well,
Marge
