>Douglas Greenberg wrote :
 
 
>Ellen Schwartz's example of the Iroquois confederacy and the constitution
>of the US is precisely appropriate for comparison to the Jefferson/Hemmings
>story.  The principle reason that the Iroquois have been implicated in
>the Constitution (which, it might be noted, William Lloyd Garrison called
>a "covenant with death") is that two 18th century English commentators,
>Cadwallader Colden and Benjamin Franklin, both admired described the
>confederacy.  Colden wrote a history of the Iroquois while Franklin in
>his discussions at the Albany Congress of 1754 compared the white colonists
>unfavorably to the Iroquois.  There is no evidence that the main architect
>of the Constitution, James Madison, was at all influenced by these comments.
>Again, as in the case of Jefferson and Hemmings, this is a subject about
>which there is some very substantial scholarship. Those of us who work in
>museums ought to be insisting on the absolute requirement that our interpretive
>activities rely upon the best available scholarly work -- whatever conclusions
>it may lead us to. History is not merely a matter of opinion; it is a
>discipline with rules of evidence and logic that ought to be respected.
>Needless to say, this is not to say that historians don't frequently
>disagree about matters like these. They do.  As it happens, however, the two
>interpretive issues that have been raised here enjoy a fair degree of
>unanimity in the scholarly literature.  To wit: there is no evidence that
>Jefferson had a sexual relationship with Sally Hemmings. And there is no
>evidence of an influence of the Iroquois Confederacy on the drafting of the
>Constitution.  Both assertions MAY be true, in other words, but there is no
>evidence to prove them.
>
 
 
The reasons for attributing Iroquois influence to the creation of the
Constitution may be more direct than the admiration of Franklin and Colden.
Jack Weatherford writes in his "Indian Givers" of the presentation by an
Iroquois leader, Canassetego to a colonial body of lawmakers, the idea of
creating a governance based on the Federation. Ronald Wright in his "Stolen
Continents" makes the same assertion about the same individual. Thomas
Paine is described by Weatherford as coming to the American question by way
of studying the Iroquois Federation as well. Whether Madison found Paine
influential or spoke with Franklin about such questions may be unproven.
Certainly Paine is inferred by most historians as influencing the creation
of the United States but it may be difficult to document actual
conversations or direct statements of attribution to Paine's writings by
the framers of the US government. Historians who interpret
contextualization from facts are certainly taking some liberty, but often
that is their function rather than to be simple conveyors of verbatim
transcripts. If the university academe system endorses these scholars
approach, and serious publishers convey the material, then it would seem
tolerable for museums to rely on these resources in their presentations. I
would agree that when a speculation is made, however, it would behoove the
student and the institution for everyone to know that. History, though
disciplined, is a cultural perspective in most instances.
 
Paul Apodaca
Curator of Native American Art
Bowers Museum of Cultural Art
Santa Ana, Ca
[log in to unmask]
 
Paul Apodaca