SOURCE
Manataka™ American Indian Council
Proudly
Presents
Controversial Indian
Symbols
on U.S. State Flags
Peter ‘FlagDancer’ Orenski
Olmecs. Mayas. Aztecs. Incas.
500-plus nations of the American continent. Indigenous Australians.
Scandinavia‟s Sami people. The Ainu of Japan. All swept aside and marginalized.
"Almost every community in Canada, the United States and Mexico was once an
Indian community ... part of hundreds of unique Indian nations that blanketed
the entire continent." 1
All were marginalized and swept aside during the
centuries following First Contact – the arrival of Columbus in the Americas in
1492. It was a first contact with violent, lasting consequences for Native
populations throughout the world.
 |
Yet reminders of Indian presence can still be found on
some flags of U.S. states. This paper will ask how appropriate are these
„reminders of Indian presence‟ in the 21st century.
Not all Native symbols on our state flags are
controversial. For example, Oklahoma – home to the largest Native American
population of any state – displays on a field of blue a warrior‟s shield made of
buffalo hide. Under its lower edge hang seven eagle feathers; superimposed on
its center, a ceremonial peace pipe crossed with an olive branch symbolizes
peace and unity between the cultures of the Indian and European-American
settlers. [Figure 1]
The same could be said of the idyllic image of an
Indian woman in full regalia dominating the seal of Florida‟s flag.
[Figure 2]
And the imagery of the Kansas flag
[Figure 3] would give pause only to someone unfamiliar
with the great buffalo hunts of Great Plains Indians.
In contrast, over the past two
decades increasing controversy has surrounded the representation of Indians or
Indian symbolism on the flags of Minnesota, New Mexico, and Massachusetts.
MINNESOTA
In
Minnesota there are 11 Tribes, seven Anishinaabe (Chippewa, Ojibwe) reservations
and four Dakota (Sioux) communities.2 Their
presence on the Minnesota flag [Figure 4] is a fairly
accurate reflection of the state‟s settlement history: Indians fleeing westward
from the farmers who displaced them. The graphic quality of the fleeing Indian
has been improved slightly over the years, but fast-fleeing the white conquest
of his lands the Indian remains. Lee Herold, native Minnesota resident, offered
some historical thoughts about the state seal. 12
NEW MEXICO
  |
New Mexico‟s flag
[Figure 5] has been the subject of quite a different controversy.
The sun symbol derives from an
image sacred to the Zia Pueblo [Figure 6], who never explicitly agreed to allow
the State to use it. The Zia did not have a chance to agree because no one asked
them. Flag designer Harry Mera – winner of the 1925 design contest sponsored by
the Daughters of the American Revolution – reportedly saw the sun symbol on a
Zia ceremonial pot in the Museum of Fine Arts in Santa Fe, the capital of New
Mexico. Problem: That pot apparently was stolen from the Pueblo reservation.
As The New York Times
reported a few years ago,3 "Mr. Pino, a Zia who has lived
all his life at the pueblo and served as assistant war chief and war chief
before becoming the tribal administrator, has traced the story of how the symbol
became the center of the state flag. That pot, Mr. Pino said, had been stolen:
only ceremonial pottery was allowed to bear the Zia, and no ceremonial pottery
was ever to leave the pueblo. And only the pueblo's elders can give permission
for use of the symbol." There is no record of Zia Elders ever giving permission
for the ceremonial pot, which inspired flag-designer Mera, to leave the Zia
reservation.
Why
were not the Zia asked for permission to use their sacred sun symbol in
1925? For
one thing, my country, along with several others, has a poor record of
asking
Indians for permission to do anything. It‟s a safe bet that no one ever
asked an Ojibwe to help design the flag of Minnesota, or a Zia to lend a
hand with New
Mexico‟s banner or, as we shall see next, an Algonquin Indian to comment
on the
flag of Massachusetts. Why did not the Zia object back in 1925? In 1925
the Zia
had barely become U.S. citizens.4 They had little power,
even less money and probably zero representation at state or federal level.
Adding insult to injury, over the
years the good people of New Mexico decided to use the Zia name and symbol –
without any kind of permission – on a variety of objects, from automobile
license plates to ... portable toilets. That‟s right, portable toilets.
5, 6 [Figure 7]
One interesting thought as we leave
New Mexico‟s flag: Notice how freely modern inhabitants of the state
appropriated symbols belonging to the land‟s original owners: Representation
without Consultation. Representation without Compensation, to boot. Some may
argue that New Mexico honored the Zia by placing their symbol of the flag. If
so, it was an honor the Zia neither requested nor agreed to. We‟ll witness more
of that before long.
MASSACHUSETTS
As far as we know Massachusetts has not yet adorned
its portable toilets with Indian symbols, though the state did find an
interesting way to represent such symbols – without consultation or
compensation, naturally – on its turnpike and multi-lane highway signs.
[Figure 8]
This particular Pilgrim‟s hat pierced by an arrow
could be seen on road signs well into the 1990s when it no longer was deemed
"politically correct" and was replaced with an arrow-free hat.
[Figure 9]
Curious minds want to know: Why the replacement? Was
it an uncomfortable reminder of 17th century conflicts between white settlers
and Indians that resulted in the near-eradication of Natives from the state? Why
would the reminder be uncomfortable for the white community? After all, settlers
won the argument: Indians were eventually swept aside and marginalized, their
lands acquired by new and, in many cases, illegitimate owners. Perhaps the
state‟s reasoning for "correcting" the highway symbol was that it drew attention
to a contentious past that made some residents uncomfortable? Night visions of
Indian raids that could bring back uncomfortable memories? The word
"uncomfortable" does seem to repeat itself.
And so an idea occurred to me in 2003: If a little
arrow could make some people uncomfortable after some 350 years, how comfortable
is the Indian community with Massachusetts‟ other symbols
How well do these symbols accord
with 21st - century sensibilities among Indians and non-Indians? Among
Massachusetts residents and those of other states? Among flag enthusiasts in
other countries? The results of the survey I conducted in 2003-2004 are shown in
their entirety on my company‟s website7
[Figures 10 and 11] record the
questions I asked Indians and non-Indians during the survey. Figure 11 shows the
Massachusetts arms, stripped of scroll, logo and white star, and asks
respondents how uncomfortable they were with the image on a scale of
1-10, where 10 was defined as "very uncomfortable." No other specifics were
given: No indication where the image appears; no mention of Massachusetts. Just
a gold-yellow Indian on a blue shield and a sworded arm poised over his head,
about to strike.
Figure 12 showed the full arms,
identified them with Massachusetts, and translated the Latin motto into English:
"By the sword we seek peace, but peace only under liberty." Again, viewers were
asked how uncomfortable they were with this image on the same scale of
1-10 as previously.
Before briefly discussing survey
findings, I owe a confession: As you have probably noticed already, I had a
difficult time being impartial on this topic, and I suspect that my past
involvement with Indian tribes and their flags influenced the form and
presentation of the survey. I aimed for neutrality, but I fear I largely failed.
Here then is a summary of how
people responded to the survey:
• Among Indians, unfavorable
comments outweighed favorable ones by 63:17, or 79% unfavorable.
• Among non-Indians,
unfavorable comments surpassed favorable ones by 61:26, or 70% unfavorable.
• Among non-Indian Massachusetts residents, a
drastic reversal: favorable comments drowned out unfavorable ones
by 14:2, or 88% favorable.
• Among non-U.S. residents,
unfavorable comments bested favorable ones by 22:1, or 96% unfavorable.
These results will not come as a
surprise to State Representative Byron Rushing of the Massachusetts legislature,
who has led an effort to change the state's seal for some two decades. In
October 2007, he stated that "the seal is anti-Indian, including placement of
the sword over the Indian's head, the inappropriate slogan and the inaccurate
attire." 8
Nor would the findings surprise John Peters, Jr., a
Mashpee Indian and executive director of the Massachusetts Commission on Indian
Affairs, who also advocated the seal change, saying "it's time history was
accurately reflected. Yes, the sword over the Indian's head is part of history,
and that (settlers) subdued the Native Americans and took their land, but it is
demeaning." 8
However, there were opposing views.
For example, Representative Jeffrey Perry argued that there is no need to change
the seal if it has been accepted by citizens and the government for more than a
century. "In the name of political correctness, we have a tendency to rewrite
history," he said. Perry suggested the symbol of the sword over the Indian's
head might not just be in opposition to the Native American, but it could also
depict a strong commonwealth that is able to defend itself." 8
The debate in Massachusetts accurately reflects the
two main reactions to the Massachusetts arms uncovered during my survey. By an
overwhelming majority, residents of Massachusetts were against any change,
speaking in typical topovexillolatric 9
terms such as:
I live in Massachusetts and I love our seal and flag
...
The motto ... perfectly captures the essential
importance of an armed citizenry to the maintenance of liberty ...
I live in Massachusetts and have grown up with this
symbol. 10
On the other side of the argument were large
majorities of Indians and non-Indians from the United States and several other
countries who judged the symbols violent, demeaning to Indians, war-like and
racist. One respondent called it "Filled with early-U.S. genocidal fetishes."
11
And one Indian wrote, If it were changed to a
Indian arm holding a hatchet over a Pilgrim, I wonder how non-Indians would feel
about that?
Which inspired the last image of this presentation
[Figure 13]. Note that the motto now reads:
Under the axe we seek peace, but peace only
under liberty. A thought-provoking point...
In conclusion, I hope this brief
study provided an interesting insight into some of the controversies surrounding
Native symbols on American state flags.
§ § § § § § §
END NOTES
1. Alvin M. Josephy, Jr., 500 Nations, Alfred
A. Knopf, New York, 1994, p. 8.
2. Indian Tribes of Minnesota:
www.indianaffairs.state.mn.us/tribes.html
3. Phil Patton, The New York Times, January 13,
2000, "Trademark Battle Over Pueblo Sign"
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A00E5D7173AF930A25752C0A9669C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all
4. The Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 granted full
U.S. citizenship to America's Indians. (The Fourteenth Amendment guarantees
citizenship to persons born in the U.S., but only if "subject to the
jurisdiction thereof"; this latter clause excludes certain indigenous people.)
The Act was signed into law by President Calvin Coolidge on June 2. 1924.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Citizenship_Act_of_1924
5.
www.indiantrademark.net/t02Articles/Exploitation/zia.html
6.
www.cnn.com/US/9909/14/new.mexico.flag
7.
www.tmealf.com/MFS/mfs.htm
8. Annie Sherman, Boston bureau of The Berkshire
Eagle, State seal is under fire, October 7, 2005, Section: Headlines,
Article ID: 3094801
9. Topovexillolatry is a neologism
defining the worship (idolatry) of whatever flag (vexillum) already exists in an
inhabited place, such as a city, village, district or state (topo < topos =
Greek for „place, any portion of space marked off from surrounding space‟,
see
http://www.studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=5117)
As Peter Klumpenhower commented in March 2009, It
seems as if the vast majority of people residing within an area (especially an
American state) will always strongly oppose any changes to their area's flag,
while other people are much more open to it. This has happened with Oklahoma,
Oregon, and Utah, and many nations around the world such as Iraq and the United
Kingdom. One could readily add Georgia, Minnesota and Mississippi to
Klumpenhower‟s list.
10. www.tmealf.com/MFS/mfs_mass_residents.htm
11. See
www.tmealf.com/MFS/mfs_non-indians.htm (Indian Responses) (U.S.
non-Indians)
www.tmealf.com/MFS/mfs_international.htm (International)
