What's in a Name?
Our recent trip out west made me think about the name “Indian”. From Rapid City, South Dakota through New Mexico and Arizona, I didn’t see much of the term “Native American”. Our tour guides, the Trading Posts and the Crazy Horse Memorial’s Indian Museum of North America overwhelmingly used the term Indian. It got me to thinking: what’s this all about?
This problem isn’t entirely new to me. Until my first trip to Canada, I glibly referred to myself as an American. That ended when I paused at the Canadian border gate and asked the attendant where I could convert my American money. He pulled out some Canadian bills and informed me that “this” was American money too. Wow, now I was nervous about what to call the money in my pockets. I quickly settled on “US money”.
With that settled, I started doubting all of it. Should I now think of myself as a “US-er"? It’s just not fair. All the other countries in this hemisphere have sensible names like Mexico and Argentina. What in the world were our founders thinking? They must have been so concerned about life, liberty and the pursuit… that they paid no attention to the name. We ended up with great founding documents and a clumsy name.
It all started innocently enough. We start with a collection of names like Virginia and New York and yearn for the simplicity of calling the whole group by one name. Well, I guess the United States was a functional start—must have been an engineer or a German. We then realize that there may be other “United States” in the world so we quickly add that this group is in the Americas (I’m surprised we didn’t go for the United States of North America). Since none of us like to say too many words when referring to something, it was quickly abbreviated to America. And there you have it—the problem.
A similar thing seems to have happened to the American Indian—although this one’s somewhat reversed. Legend has it that Christopher Columbus coined the description. He had no idea that he’d just met people divided into many tribes throughout the Americas. This could have been a quite handy mistake for the rest of us. Had he known that he’d just met members of the Taino tribe and then had gone on to become of aware of the Tekesta and the Jeaga and so on, he may have come up with a Rube Goldberg concoction like the US of A. So serendipity simplified things for us right at the beginning.
But there were problems. The real Indians, from India, started moving to the Americas to run motels and become physicians. So now we have a problem. How do we distinguish between these two peoples? And that’s only the beginning because some Indians are from the East Indies, the West Indies and even the Indian Union. Columbus started out doing us a favor but only if he had come up with some name that wasn’t already in use! I understand that the Australians (who always beat us out of the Cup*) are so glad that some Indian sailing south to get to Russia didn’t accidentally discover the Aborigines. They would have been dubbed Russians. The upside is that, like us, the Aussies may have been too busy to pay any attention to the Cup.
Growing up as a US-er, I heard of the Indians-of-the-Americas first. Therefore they were the real ones. When I heard of the others I knew we were in trouble. But later, the learned among us came up with “Native American” and I thought that we had a solution. The learned then told us that not only was this convenient but that we must change our ways because the term Indian was pejorative and that the Choctaw and the others didn’t want to be called Indians.
With this new term, US of A became comprised of the Native Americans, the Indians and the rest of us. But the learned went on to tell us that we all had to become “something American”. This meant we had Native Americans, Indian Americans, Bhutan Americans and so on. Oh no, now we’re back to complicating. Everyone has two names and the Native Americans might end up with two different “something American” names. To make it even more complicated, we find that the Native Americans aren’t native at all but had simply come here before everyone else. I don’t know where they came from, maybe Siberia. If so how do we distinguish the Siberian Americans (formerly Indians) from the real Siberian Americans. Have we come full circle?
Oh and to make a short story long, I found a Hong Kong Canadian who exchanged my money.
_________________________________________________________________
* Coincidence? The rise of Political Correctness and the Australian upset in the America’s Cup was both in the early 1980s.
4 comments:
Good essay. The Simpsons had a funny episode about this, when Hapu, the convenience-store owner from India got his American citizenship. Lisa. the learned one on the show said something about Native Americans, and Homer said: "That's right. Native Americans like us." Lisa: "No, I mean American Indians." Hapu: "Like me!"
Hi, Dad. I really enjoyed this essay. The name game is even more befuddled than you have seen. It seems that the only people who truly have a right to be identified with a tract of land were put there with the forceful hand of God many years ago. The rest of us have drifted across the globe, claiming native rights to wherever we plant. Moreover, we all have common ancestors, yet try to force upon ourselves artificial designations that go beyond our species.
Not only the Indians, but America and Columbus are misnomers, as you may know. The continents of the western hemisphere are named for Amerigo Vespucci (1451-1512), who explored the eastern coastline of South America at the end of the 15th century and beginning of the 16th. Several years later a mapmaker published the new information, designating the continents "America," and the name stuck. Cristoforo Colombo (1451-1506) was probably from Genoa, but served the King and Queen of Spain, where he was known as Cristóbal Colón. I've never really understood why a name would change so much from one region to the next like that. The name "Indians" is often ascribed to his erroneous conclusion that he had reached the Southeast Asian islands known to the Europeans as "The Indies" when in fact he had reached the Caribbean Islands.
There is no doubt in my mind that at the time of Independence, the founding fathers placed the emphasis on "United States," and only secondarily on "America." The "America" was included simply because collectively the original thirteen states had previously been known as the American Colonies. Indeed, the original Articles of Confederation focused far more on the individual States than on the fact that they were united. How many people do you know who can name any of the U.S. Presidents who preceeded George Washington?
In much of the world, the "America" is left off, and the country is simply known as the United States, translated to the local language. Of the three nations of North America, two have "America" in the name. Canada is known as "Canada," then south is "United States of America," and furthest south is "Mexican United States." In Mexico, the name "North America" is used in the name of the USA (Estados Unidos del Norteamerica), as opposed to Mexico's name for itself, "Estados Unidos Mexicanos." Also, in the Spanish language, "US" is "EU" (Estados Unidos). Since both the USA and Mexico have this name, Mexicans simply double the letters when referring to the USA. So Mexico is abbreviated "EU," and the USA is abbreviated "EEUU."
Some worthless information from the vault.
Jeff
Thanks Jeff. With all that to chew on, we can forget about concentratrating on the cup.
Thanks Dennis. Years ago you tried to introduce me to the Simpsons. Now I'm interested.
Post a Comment