In Query 11 (“Aborigines”) of Jefferson’s “Notes on the State of Virginia” Jefferson discusses the various tribes of Native Americans that were present when the colonists first arrived to America. In this discussion Jefferson comes across as very disrespectful towards the Native Americans, however, it is obvious that he is not intentionally doing so. To Jefferson, the way he is addressing the Native Americans is normal and completely acceptable, but in today’s society his words and actions would not be tolerated.
Jefferson held the same belief of most Englishmen from this time period—that they were superior to the Natives. He mocks the Native Americans for having no government and explains that the only reason they divide themselves into separate tribes is because “they have never submitted themselves to any laws, any coercive power, any shadow of government. Their only controls are their manners, and that moral sense of right and wrong, which, like the sense of tasting and feeling, in every man makes a part of his nature.” I interpret this statement to mean that not only do the Native Americans lack the civilization of the English, but the only good qualities that have are those that are inherent in every man, thus they are clearly inferior to the Europeans. His beliefs become more evident when he refers to them as “savage Americans” and to the English as “civilized Europeans.” Furthermore, Jefferson goes on to explain that “as imperfect as this species of coercion may seem, crimes are very rare among them” (note that he refers to the Native Americans as a “species of coercion”) due to their lack of government. However, “great societies cannot exist without government. The Savages therefore break them into small ones.” I understand this to mean that Jefferson believes that great societies, like England, can not exist without government, thus, the Native Americans must split into smaller societies and will never form a great society. Jefferson’s obvious racism would not be well tolerated in today’s society, however during his lifetime this was the common view of the Native Americans, and therefore I don’t feel that Jefferson means any harm in what he is saying.
The portion of this query that stood out the most in my mind was Jefferson’s description of the Native American burial rituals and the burial ground he came across. He mocks the rituals of the Native Americans stating that there is “no such thing existing as an Indian monument: for would not honor with that name arrow points, stone hatchets, stone pipes, and half-shapen images.” He then goes into an anecdote of when he “opened and examined it [an Indian burial ground] thoroughly.” Jefferson goes into a detailed account of how he dissected the burial mound, the position in which he found the bones, the types of bones he found, their size, color, and the age of the deceased human. Today, his actions would be shocking in that he would be so disrespectful as to dig up and completely destroy this sacred piece of land. However, Jefferson does not commit this act out of spite or hatred; he is doing so in a very scientific manner. He views the burial ground as a great learning opportunity to understand more about these foreign people. Jefferson is very scientific in his examination of the bones. He compares their sizes to determine the age of the bone, observes the color of the bone to get an idea of how long it has been buried—all of this helps to justify that Jefferson’s actions, although disrespectful by today’s society, were done in the name of science and in his mind completely acceptable.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Lauren,
Your comments on the Indian mounds section of Notes on the State of Virginia raises some excellent points, particularly your insight about Jefferson's scientific excavation of the mound. You've also done a good job of picking apart his sentences and highlighting some of the assumptions buried in his diction.
However, I think you're slightly misreading Jefferson's take on Native American government. When he says "species of coercion," he's referring not to Native Americans but to their methods of punishing crime (e.g. "contempt, by exclusion from society, or, where the case is serious, as that of murder, by the individuals whom it concerns"). And he actually remarks that the Native America "condition of existence" in a society with "no law" is preferable to the European system of "too much law": "insomuch that were it made a question, whether no law, as among the savage Americans, or too much law, as among the civilized Europeans, submits man to the greatest evil, one who has seen both conditions of existence would pronounce it to be the last: and that the sheep are happier of themselves, than under care of the wolves." Overall, though, I think your points about Jefferson's inconsistent treatment of Native Americans are well taken.
Kelly
Post a Comment