Native American name controversy

The Native American name controversy is an ongoing dispute over the acceptable ways to refer to the indigenous peoples of the Americas and to the broad subsets thereof, such as those living in a specific country or sharing certain cultural attributes. Once-common terms like "Indian" remain in use, despite the introduction of terms such as "Native American" during the latter half of the 20th century.

Many English terms have been used or considered for such purposes, such as the more politically correct terms:Native Americans, Original Americans, First Nations, Indigenous Peoples of America,; there are also terms that retain the name Indian but attempt to qualify it: American Indians (or simply Indians), the American Indian race,Amerindians, Amerinds. There remain names specifically rooted in racism against Native American people, many of which have cultural references which are regularly contested. Such names include:Red Indians, Wagon-burners, Injins, "Chiefs" and more. Finally, there are names of individual bands or tribes that are in favored use in some circles.

None of the names have found universal acceptance, each name typically having a particular audience, political or cultural connotation, and regional acceptance.

Generalized arguments for and against any particular naming convention include:

• sentimental attachment to a previous name (example: "Indian" is a name many elders were raised with, and families express desire to use that term the elders are familiar with);
• the feeling that a term is quaint or pejorative, as for Eskimo;
• the notion that a name was provided by an outsider and not the individual Tribe or Indian people at large (Indian came from Columbus' mistake, Nez Perce is a french word)
• the name is inherently racist, or has over time acquired racist overtones
• the name is too inclusive or not inclusive enough off all indigenous people, so does not effectively convey the "group" intended. (Aboriginal is often first associated with Australian Aborigines, Indigenous is used by the UN to indicate all tribal peoples around the world. Native American does not generally include Canadians and Mexicans)
• reluctance of individual groups to be referred to by a collective name
• suggestion that a universal/collective name reinforces the stereotypes of "a" single Native America with one type of Indian, one religion, one set of beliefs and one language.

Specific arguments for and against particular names include:

• the general connection of any naming convention using the word "Indian" to India, an error in naming from the earliest contact;
• application of the name "American" to people not from the United States. (Names such as "Native Canadian" are explicitly used by Canadian tribes to change that ambiguity).
• specific application of a more generalized term likenative which by definition suggests that anyone born within a country is a "Native" of that country, thus creating legal and social arguments over what "Native" means in any context;
• conflict with prior legal definitions for some terms like Aboriginal;
• political and legal implications of the name, as with Native or Nation;

Further complications arise when translating names between different languages, since even words that are closely related linguistically may have very different cultural loads in the respective speaker communities. "The People", "First Men" and "Original People" are the most common translations for various Indigenous American tribes.

In some countries, certain broad names have been defined by law, such as First Nations and Aboriginal peoples in Canada. Even in those cases, there may be lingering debates on whether certain groups fit the legal definition or not, or whether the name or its definition are adequate.

Endonyms and exonyms

Where controversy exists over the naming of a group of people, one solution is to use the name preferred by the people in question themselves. However, this principle applies poorly to large multi-ethnic groups, since different sub-groups often have incompatible preferences. Moreover, every natural language has traditionally ignored this principle, exerting its privilege to invent its own ethnic terms for other peoples. English is no exception, and uses terms such as German, Dutch, and Albanian, disregarding the self-appellations and preferences of those subjects (Deutsch, Nederlands, and Shqip). Not surprisingly, English names for the pre-Columbian Americans are largely assigned by tradition, and are not always accepted by the peoples themselves.

Meanings of basic terms

A major source of confusion and controversy is that many of the words that are or could be used in naming those peoples are inherently ambiguous or inappropriate.

Indian

The term Indian is commonly thought to have begun with the misconception by Christopher Columbus that the Caribbean islands were the islands of the Indian Ocean, known to Europeans as the Indies, which he had hoped to reach by sailing west across the Atlantic. Even though Columbus's mistake was soon recognized, the name stuck, and for centuries the native people of the Americas were collectively called Indians. However, this is disputed by Indian activist Russel Means, who believes the word Indian derives not from a confusion with India but from a Spanish expression En Dio, meaning "in God". Much of the use of the word has to do with connotation more than definition.

2. Of or pertaining to the aborigines, or Indians, of America; as, Indian wars; the Indian tomahawk. [1913 Webster]

2. One of the aboriginal inhabitants of America;– so called originally from the supposed identity of America with India. [1913 Webster]

The American Heritage Dictionary excludes "Eskimos, Aleuts, and Inuit" from Indian in an American context.

The 2006 Associated Press Stylebook recommends use of the term American Indian and reserves Native American only for direct quotations and names of organizations.

The terms "Indian" and "American Indian" are used by the U.S. government as standard descriptors. There is a Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), for example. Similarly, the Smithsonian's new National Museum of the American Indian in Washington, DC (2004), uses the older term, as does its quarterly full-color publication, American Indian.

In Canada, although all governments are now careful to use the terms First Nations (for "Indians") and aboriginals (First Nations, plus Métis and Inuit), the federal ministerial portfolio in charge of their affairs is the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs, and "Indian Reserve" is still a legal land description. Some First Nations also use "Indian Band" in their official names.

The usage "Red Indian", common outside of North America , is offensive to many, and somewhat archaic in the United States and Canada.

In Mexico, the use of "Indio" is offensive to many, and sometimes cause of dispute.

American

The meaning of American has two common meanings: while it may refer to the Americas in general (meaning 1), it often refers specifically (therefore not exclusively) to the United States of America and its territories (meaning 2). Further,

A native of America;– originally applied to the aboriginal inhabitants, but now applied to the descendants of Europeans born in America, and especially to the citizens of the United States. [1913 Webster]

WordNet gives the primary meaning as the U.S., the secondary as the language, and the tertiary as the Americas.

Merriam-Webster gives (1) an American Indian of the Americas; (2) an inhabitant of the Americas, native or not; (3) a U.S. citizen; and (4) the language. The American Heritage Dictionary gives three meanings as Merriam-Webster, without "an American Indian".

Native

The word native (from Latin natus meaning born) has often been applied to ethnic groups to mean "a group who lived in some place before the arrival of other groups"; in this context, specifically, "before the arrival of the Europeans".

However, a more specific meaning of "native" is "born in," and thus the term native American or native of the Americas could be equally applicable to anyone born in the Americas or in United States. The word probably acquired the other (ethno-historical) sense in the early years of European naval exploration and colonial expansion, when the "natives"—the people "born in" the foreign countries—were indeed non-Europeans.

Expressions such as native-born may be used to further qualify that the intended meaning is the common one (i.e., "born in or originating from a given place"), and not the formal, specific designation (i.e., "Native" in the sense of belonging to an identified indigenous group), if the context does not otherwise make this distinction clear. Whether such nicety of definition justifies a tautologous neologism only time will tell.

Furthermore, in the United States the expression Native American has acquired a specific technical and legal meaning, which is discussed in a later section. In principle this narrower sense is indicated by capitalizing the word native. However, one must be aware that this typographical detail is easily lost on careless readers, and of course ineffective in speech.

The term "Native American" as a sort of disfranchisement applies to most people born in the United States after 1776. For example, a living person born in the United States whose great-great grandparents were all born in Europe would be neither Native American nor Native European.

The word native is also problematic because of its political implications, since "native" ethnic groups sometimes claim to have more rights—to natural resources, political offices, indemnities, cultural prestige, etc.—than the "non-native" groups who arrived later; the implication being that the "non-natives" are "aliens," "foreigners," "usurpers," etc.—even if their ancestors have lived in the place for many generations. "Many" is relative. Native Americans have lived and travelled their "usual and accustomed grounds" (a common treaty term) since the end of the last glacial period (c. 8,000 B.C.—10,000 years ago), along the northern tier of what is now the United States, definitively at least 4,000 years B.C. in what is now Seattle, for one example. Native Americans have lived elsewhere in the Americas far longer. When the people of the Norte Chico were building at least seven large-scale settlements on the Peruvian coast between 3200 B.C. and 2500 B.C., there was only one other urban complex on the planet: Sumer, in the Tigris-Euphrates valley.

Such claims (or the possibility thereof) may lead to rejection of the label by the "non-natives". These may argue, e.g., that the "natives" themselves were invaders to even earlier inhabitants; or that they are no longer residing on their "native" land; or that there is insufficient historical evidence of their native status; and so on. The issue boils down to the undecidable question of how long a group should reside in a place before it deserves the label "native". This reaction has actually occurred in the US, for example, against the term Native Americans.

Indigenous

Even though the term "indigenous" may sound similar to "Indian," the two are quite unrelated. The term comes from Latin indigena, "native," formed from indu "in" and gen- "beget".

According to The American Heritage Dictionary: "Indigenous specifies that something or someone is native rather than coming or being brought in from elsewhere: an indigenous crop; the Ainu, a people indigenous to the northernmost islands of Japan."

Aboriginal and Aborigine

The English adjective "aboriginal" and the noun "aborigine" come from a Latin phrase meaning "from the origin," which was first applied to native peoples of central Italy who were contemporaries of the ancient Romans.

According to this etymology, therefore, it could be used for ethnic groups who "were there since the beginning," i.e. the first to arrive in a region, or those who can be identified in the earliest historical or archaeological records. Indeed, it has been occasionally used in this sense in English, at least since the 19th century, for indigenous populations all over the world, including the Americas.

Aboriginal may imply a more direct or ancient link to the past (especially one that predates recorded history) than indigenous, but there is considerable overlap in meaning between the two terms.

However, this general use has been largely preempted by narrower legal or common usage definitions that it has received in some countries. Throughout most of the English-speaking world, it is commonly understood to refer to the Indigenous Australians. It has also special legal status in Canada (see below).

The term Amerigine, another possible single-word term for indigenous American, and initially used as a reference term in studies of American prehistory, that was proposed by the author, B. Jonson in 1961 , also could be derived from "aboriginal".

Names for United States native peoples

In the United States, Native American and American Indian are commonly used to denote the indigenous peoples in the United States. Both terms are almost exclusively used to describe the natives of the contiguous United States, usually excluding the indigenous peoples of Hawaiʻi and the Aleut, Inuit, and Yupik peoples of the far north.

The terms Alaska Natives is used for the indigenous peoples in Alaska (including the Eskimos), and Native Hawaiians is used for those of Hawaiʻi.

Indian and American Indian

"American Indian" is often a legal term. It is the phrase used to describe indigenous people of the western hemisphere in United States Federal as well as many state and local laws. Most treaties refer to "American Indians" of a particular tribe. It makes sense to refer to "American Indians" when referencing legal issues. (I.e. The United States signed treaties with more than 800 "American Indian" tribes.) In addition, the term "Indian" is used twice in the U.S. Constitution.

In the 1960s and 1970s efforts were made to change "Indian" to "Native American" or, sometimes, "Amerindian". It was not entirely successful, with the new name being as problematic as the old. For one, it can on the literal level mean anyone born in the Western Hemisphere, not just Indians. For another, users of the old term "Indian" had not typically included the people of the far north (Inuit, Aleut, etc.), but the new term implicitly grouped them with their neighbors to the south, thus losing a distinction that some had found useful.

Many of those involved prefer Indian or American Indian to Native Americans. Charles C. Mann noted in his 2005 book 1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus that "every native person whom I have met (I think without exception) has used 'Indian' rather than 'Native American'." Russell Means, an activist in the American Indian Movement, said in 1998, "I abhor the term Native American...I prefer the term American Indian because I know its origins."

One historical basis for the distaste that many Indians have for the designation "Native American" stems from non-Christian aspects of the early Native American Church. In its Annual Report for the year 1916, the Indian Rights Association (IRA) included an article entitled "The Ravages of Peyote," which attacked the "baneful" effects of the peyote religion: "[a farmer's] health is often affected, and interest is lost in the things which tend to better living." The Report describes Native American Church practices as unchristian, indulgent, and sexualized.(As a defensive measure, in 1918, the peyote religion adopted its current name, Native American Church, first in Oklahoma, and in at least six other states by 1925).

The term American Indian is often shortened to Indian when the context allows, e.g. in the name of the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs. The derivative term Injun is considered offensive.

Native American

Description and usage

The term Native American was introduced in the United States in the 1960s and 1970s by those who hoped it would be more accurate than Indian and free from its negative stereotypes. What it means exactly depends on the context of its use, and who is using it, and is thus often a great source of confusion. It can mean:

1. All Indians of the Americas
2. All Indians of the Americas, excluding the Inuit, Aleut, native Hawaiians and some others who arrived later.
3. Indians indigenous to pre-Columbian America who are presently living in the United States, including Inuit, Aleuts, Hawaiians and native Pacific Islanders (Native American Languages Act of 1990).
4. All Indians of the Americas, including the U.S. and Canada but not including Mexico or further south
5. Anyone born in the Americas, including those of European descent for example.

Many of those who are covered by the term strongly prefer "American Indian" over "Native American". According to the US Census Bureau, as of 1995 50% preferred "American Indian", 37% "Native American", and the remainder preferred other terms or had no preference. The term has also been contested by some non-Native U.S. citizens, both for the perception that the name diminished their own status or rights (anyone born in the US could be called a "Native American"), and also as part of the general backlash against "political correctness", for which the term was often cited as an example. However, there is a growing consensus that either term is correct and that the terms may be used interchangeably. However, many now prefer to be designated by their specific tribe.

History

Prior to 1918, and predominantly until the 1960s, "Native American" meant "originating in America," as in the titles of books (from the Online Catalog of the Library of Congress database, OCLC):

Native American Balladry (G. Malcolm Laws, 1964)
Native American Humor (Walter Blair, 1960)
Native American: the Book of My Youth (Ray Stannard Baker, 1941)
A Native American (William Saroyan, 1938)
Native American Anarchism (Eunice Minette Schuster, 1932, 1970)

In The Peyote Cult, (Yale University Press, 1938, 5th ed. 1989), Weston La Barre traces the meaning of "Native American" as "American Indian" to the year 1918, when leaders of the Peyote Religion in Oklahoma incorporated as the Native American Church (of Oklahoma), followed by incorporation of the Native American Church of North America in 1950.

In 1918, an earlier ban against the sacramental use of psychotropic peyote had been repealed by the State of Oklahoma. However, the same year, the national Bureau of Indian Affairs sought to impose a federal ban. In response, a group of Oto, Kiowa, and Arapaho met at Cheyenne, Oklahoma to "decide upon measures of defense for peyotism." The proposed name "First-born Church of Christ" was rejected. "The title ultimately chosen was the 'Native American Church,' which emphasized the intertribal solidarity of the cult, as well as its aboriginality." (Quoted material is from La Barre, page 169.)

Among the earliest titles (in the OCLC database) in which "Native American" means "American Indian" are these:

Peyote Songs: Music of the Native American Church of North America (Indian) (sound recording, 1967)
Native American Arts (Indian Arts and Crafts Board, Washington, D.C., 1968)
Buffalo Hearts, A Native Amerian's View of Indian Culture, Religion and History (Sun Bear, 1970)
Indian Voices: the Native American Today (Convocation of American Indian Scholars, 1971)
Native American tribalism; Indian Suvivals and Renewals (D'Arcy McNicle, 1973)

The Oxford English Dictionary (article on "Native", note 15) offers the year 1956 as earliest usage of "Native American" meaning "North American Indian", the example being a letter in which Aldous Huxley mentioned the "Native American churchmen." The only other early-usage examples are dated 1973–1974 and are from the Black Panther and New Society magazines. One of the articles refers to the Native American Church and the other two do not.

To summarize: "Native American" originally meant "originating in America," without reference to American Indians. In 1918, the "Native American Church" was incorporated, and in beginning in the 1960s the term "Native American," sometimes pertaining to the Church and sometimes not, began to appear in titles of books, magazine articles, and musical recordings.

Alaska Native

In Alaska, the term Alaska Native predominates, because of its legal use in the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) and because it includes the Aleut, Inuit and Yupik peoples, the three groups of native Alaskan peoples.

Eskimos was once used for those groups, but this term is in disfavor because it is perceived by many of them as derogatory. This is further complicated by the fact that the term Inuit is sometimes used to refer to any of the groups, leading non-Inuit (particularly amongst the Yupik peoples) to actually prefer Eskimo, comparatively speaking. Inuit are "a people inhabiting the Arctic (northern Canada or Greenland or Alaska or eastern Siberia); the Algonquians called them Eskimo ('eaters of raw flesh') but they call themselves the Inuit ('the people') [syn: {Esquimau}, {Eskimo}]"

Amerind

The term Amerind is a blended form of American Indigenous. However, this term also has been controversial, as it might be confused with a similar-sounding term, Amerindian.

Discredited terms

Redskin

The name redskin was a term for Native Americans and one of the color metaphors for race used in North America and Europe throughout history. It is a counterpart to "pale face" or "pale skin", a term that some Native Americans supposedly used for Caucasians. Both are often considered pejorative. As with any term perceived to be discriminatory, different individuals may hold differing opinions of the term's appropriateness.

The term's use was not restricted to the United States or North America. Redskin and a similar term, "red Indian", were in use throughout the English-speaking world and, in equivalent transliterations, in Europe throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries as a common term of reference for indigenous Americans. For example, the French translation peaux-rouges was used in Arthur Rimbaud's Le Bateau ivre and several of the travelogues of Jean Raspail.

Savage

The term Savage was once used in anthropology as a blanket term for indigenous peoples worldwide (e.g. Bronislaw Malinowski's 1929 study, The Sexual Life of Savages). As late as the beginning of the Nineteenth Century, the United States government often used the term in dealing with Indian nations (see, e.g., the Justice Baldwin's dissenting opinion in Cherokee Nation v. Georgia)

Other derogatory terms

Another pejorative term that was once broadly accepted is "heathens", referring to the Native Americans' presumed non-Judeo-Christian religious beliefs. "Injun" is an intentional-mispronunciation of "Indian", generally used in a joking way to mock or impersonate Native Americans' supposed accented English (e.g. "Honest Injun", "Injun time"). These terms are now universally considered derogatory and bigoted. Most Native Americans now agree that "Squaw" is a derogatory word as well with negative connotations of Native American women. "Indian princess" is increasingly out of popular usage among Native Americans and held demeaning to Native American women.

Names for Canadian native peoples

In Canada, the term Aboriginal peoples in Canada is used for all indigenous peoples established in the country, including the Inuit and Inuvialuit, as well as the Métis.

The term First Nations is used in a more restricted sense, for all the indigenous peoples in Canada except the Inuit, Inuvialuit, and Métis — that is, the groups that would formerly have been encompassed by the term "Indian".

First Nations

In Canada, the term First Nations (most often used in the plural) has come into general use for the Indigenous peoples of North America located in what is now Canada, and their descendants, who are neither Inuit nor Métis. The singular commonly used on culturally politicized reserves is the awkward First Nations person (when gender-specific, First Nations man or First Nations woman). A more recent trend is for members of various nations to refer to themselves by their tribal or national identity only, e.g. "I'm Haida," "we're Kwantlens," in recognition of the distinctiveness and diversity of First Nations ethnicities.

However, some tribal governments of Canada also use the term First Nations to refer to any indigenous, tribal or nomadic society. In this usage, the Roma, Sinti, Saami, Māori, Hmong, and the Australian Aborigines are also considered "First Nations".

Canadian Indians

The term Indians was once used to refer to the peoples now called First Nations, but it has fallen largely in disuse in official contexts and media usage. However, it is still relevant in many legal and administrative contexts and remains common in speech.

The Canadian Indian Act, which defines the rights of people of recognized First Nations, does refer to them as Indians. The responsible federal government department is the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs, headed by the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development. People officially recognized by the Indian Register under that act are commonly known as Status Indians, although Registered Indian is the official term. Land set aside for the use of First Nations are known as Indian reserves.

The term Indian is also still used in the official names of some First Nations bands and tribal councils, and also organizations such as the Native Indian Brotherhood and the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs.

Aboriginal peoples in Canada

The term Aboriginal is defined in the Canadian Constitution to include "all Indian, Inuit, and Métis peoples of Canada" (Constitution Act, 1982, Subsection 35(2). The term is understood to include also the Inuvialuit.

The term is also used in the United States, though much less frequently. It is occasionally used in the United Kingdom. The term Aborigines is not used in Canada to refer to indigenous American peoples.

The alternative term indigenous peoples (or tribes or nations) has been used as equivalent to Aboriginal peoples.

Native Canadians

Native or Native Canadian is an ambiguous term, but it is often used in conversation or informal writing. However, First Nations and Aboriginal peoples seem to be more widely used.

Anishinaabe

The Algonquin autonym, Anishinaabe or Anishinabe, is used as a cross-tribal term in Algonquian majority areas such as Anishnabe Health and Anishnabe Education and Training Circle. The term is also used in the Upper Midwest region of the United States.

Canadian French nomenclature

In Canadian French, the terms are première(s) nation(s) for "First Nations" and autochtone for "Aboriginal" (used both as a noun and adjective).

The term indien or indienne is used in the legislation, although the preferred term is now amérindien. The term indigène is not used as it is seen as having negative connotations because of its similarity to the French equivalent of indigent ("poor"). The old French term sauvage ("wild") is no longer used either, as it is considered racist.

Chinook Jargon nomenclature

The Chinook Jargon, the old trade language of the Pacific Northwest, uses siwash—an adaptation of the French sauvage—for Indian, Native American, or First Nations, either as adjective or noun. While normally meaning a male native, it is used in certain combinations, like siwash cosho ("a seal", literally "Indian pig" or "Indian pork").

Like sauvage, siwash has come to have negative connotations in many native communities, while it remains in common parlance in others. When used by non-natives it is considered entirely derogatory except in placenames and certain other usages. In the creolized form of Chinook Jargon spoken at the Grand Ronde Agency in Oregon, a distinction is made between siwash and sawash. The accent in the latter is on the second syllable, resembling the French original, and is used in Grand Ronde Jargon with the benign meaning of "anything native or Indian", while siwash is considered defamatory.

The Chinook Jargon term for a native woman is klootchman, an originally Nootkan word which became commonplace in regional English to mean a native woman, or (as in the Jargon), all women and also anything female. Hyas klootchman tyee, "queen", klootchman cosho, "sow"; klootchman tenas or tenas klootchman, "girl" or "little girl". Generally when used by itself in regional English klootchman means a native woman only, and has not acquired a derisive sense as has siwash or squaw. The short form klootch, encountered only in English-Chinook hybrid phrasings, is often derisive, however, especially with modifiers (e.g. "blue-eyed klootch"). .

Names by continent

North America

There is no accepted special name for all indigenous peoples in North America as a whole, although Native American is sometimes used, though rarely in Canada. The term North American Indian is often used for a member of the more restricted group comprising the First Nations in Canada together with the Native Americans in the United States. This term is usually understood to exclude the Alaskan Natives and the Inuit and Métis of Canada, and the indigenous peoples of Mexico. In Mexico, the preferred expression is Indigenous Peoples (pueblos indígenas in Spanish, however, Indians (indios, índios) is often used too, even by indigenous peoples themselves, since this expression is not seen as derogatory.

South America

In South America, like in Mexico, the preferred expression is Indigenous Peoples (pueblos indígenas in Spanish, povos indígenas in Portuguese). However, Indians (indios, índios) is often used too, even by indigenous peoples themselves, since this expression is not seen as derogatory. It should also be noted that in Portuguese índios does not conflict with the word for natives of India (indianos).

Indigenous Peoples and Indians of Latin America

In Mexico, Brazil, and several other countries, these names are normally applied only to the ethnic groups that have maintained their identity and, to a some extent, their original way of life. In those countries there is also a large segment of the population with mixed native and European ancestry, who are largely integrated in mainstream society, and no longer identify themselves with their ancestral native groups. There are also Ladinos who do not have significant European ancestry, but have adopted the culture of the White and Mestizo population. These people were originally called mestizos in Mexico, caboclos in Brazil; however, those terms have largely fallen in disuse as that segment has come to predominate among the population.

Aborigines

The Spanish aborigen, cognate of English Aborigine, is also used in Spanish America, particularly in Chile and Argentina. The corresponding Portuguese term, aborígenas, is almost never used in Brazil.

Pre-Columbian and Pre-Cabraline Peoples

The term "Pre-Columbian Peoples" (Sp. pueblos precolombinos, Pt. povos pré-colombianos) is used to refer to the ethnic groups that existed before the arrival of the Europeans, but not for their modern descendants. The term refers to Columbus, who landed in Hispaniola in 1492.

In Brazil, Pre-Columbian is often replaced by "Pre-Cabraline" (Pt. pré-cabralinos), after Cabral who first landed in Brazil in 1500.

In both Americas

For the natives of the Americas as a whole, the phrase indigenous peoples of the Americas can be considered self-defined by the accepted meanings of "indigenous peoples" and "Americas," and seems to be the current preferred term in some anthropological and linguistic circles.

Still, its precise meaning can be disputed. For example, it is debatable whether it includes the indigenous people of Hawaiʻi and other US territories outside the Americas. While those peoples have no known historical, cultural, or genetic connection with the indigenous peoples of the Americas, from a political and legal viewpoint they should arguably be considered "indigenous peoples" of their respective countries.

Other names that have been used or proposed for the indigenous peoples of both continents include:

Indian

As discussed above (# Indian and American Indian), this term has much precedence in the United States, but is considered offensive by some. However some older generations of Native Americans call themselves that.

American Indian

Given the ambiguity of Indian, it was often necessary to use American Indian in order to distinguish those peoples from the natives of the East Indies, or the West Indies. However, as noted above, American itself is ambiguous.

Red Indian

In Britain and some other English-speaking countries outside the Americas, the term Red Indian is still used to differentiate the American natives from the "East Indians". .However, in North America the term is now considered an offensive racial slur, and is rarely if ever used.

Amerindian

In the French-speaking world, the term Amérindien was coined for the same purpose. The term was imported into English as Amerindian, sometimes abbreviated Amerind. This term gained some popularity among linguists, anthropologists, and other social scientists. The term is officially used by The World Almanac.

However, in scientific circles the term Amerind is often restricted to a subset of the indigenous peoples of the Americas, mostly from South and Central America, Mexico and the Southern United States. The peoples in this group share many genetic and cultural features that set them apart from the Na-Dene peoples, which comprise a significant portion of the U.S. and southern Canada indigenous peoples, and from the Eskimo peoples in Alaska and the Canadian Arctic: (Inuit, Yupik, and Aleut). Many anthropologists believe that these Amerind peoples are the descendants of the first immigrant wave from Siberia (15,000–10,000 years ago).

Native American or American Native

At face value, Native American and American Native could be taken to mean indigenous peoples of the Americas. This meaning is used in this article; however, some restrict its meaning to refer specifically for peoples in the United States, as discussed above, (# Meanings of basic terms). This term is also regarded as offensive by some, as discussed above, (# Indian and American Indian).

See also

• Abya Yala, a proposed native (from the Panama Kunas) name for the Americas, avoiding the mention of Amerigo Vespucci or Richard Amerike.
• Individual tribal or ethnic groups which have their own naming controversies:
  • Cherokee
  • Haida
  • Taino
  • Yanomami

Bibliography

• The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 2000. ISBN 0-395-82517-2 (hardcover), ISBN 0-618-08230-1hardcover with CD ROM). {{cite book}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help); Check |isbn= value: invalid character (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  Fourth Edition
• Brunner, Borgna (2006). ""American Indian versus Native American: A once-heated issue has sorted itself out"". Retrieved not recorded. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help); Cite has empty unknown parameters: |coauthors= and |month= (help)
  Includes sources (including quotes Russel Means at "I am an American Indian, Not a Native American!" and Christina Berry at "What's in a Name? Indians and Political Correctness", also referenced on this page).
• Carlin, George (1997). Brain droppings. New York: Hyperion. ISBN 0-7868-6313-7. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
• Dailey, Tom (2006-06-14). ""Duwamish-Seattle"". "Coast Salish Villages of Puget Sound". Retrieved 2006-04-21. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |month= (help); External link in |work= (help)
  Page links to Village Descriptions Duwamish-Seattle section [2].
  Dailey referenced "Puget Sound Geography" by T. T. Waterman. Washington DC: National Anthropological Archives, mss. [n.d.] [ref. 2];
  Duwamish et al. vs. United States of America, F-275. Washington DC: US Court of Claims, 1927. [ref. 5];
  "Indian Lake Washington" by David Buerge in the Seattle Weekly, 1-7 August 1984 [ref. 8];
  "Seattle Before Seattle" by David Buerge in the Seattle Weekly, 17-23 December 1980. [ref. 9];
  The Puyallup-Nisqually by Marian W. Smith. New York: Columbia University Press, 1940. [ref. 10].
  Recommended start is "Coast Salish Villages of Puget Sound" [3].
• d'Errico, Peter (2005-12-20). "An interview with Charles C. Mann". Indian Country Today. Retrieved 2006-08-06. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  Part 1 and Part 2 of 2
• d'Errico, Peter, Legal Studies Department, University of Massachusetts (2005-07-11). ""Native American Indian Studies - A Note on Names"". University of Massachusetts. Retrieved 2006-08-06. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameters: |coauthors= and |month= (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  Provides references.
• Dyck, Michael (ed.) (16 June 2002). ibiblio - Open and Free Resources, the GNU version of The Collaborative International Dictionary of English, presented in the Extensible Markup Language. Based on GCIDE version 0.46 (15 April 2002). Retrieved 21 April 2006.
• George; staff report, Straight Dope Science Advisory Board (2001-10-25). ""Does 'Indian' derive from Columbus's description of Native Americans as una gente in Dios?"". Chicago Reader, Inc. Retrieved 2006-04-21. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameters: |coauthors= and |month= (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
• Mann, Charles C. (2005). 1491 : new revelations of the Americas before Columbus. New York: Knopf. ISBN 1-4000-4006-X (alk. paper). {{cite book}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help); Check |isbn= value: invalid character (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
• Means, Russell (1996 (c), last update 2000-12-16). ""I am an American Indian, Not a Native American!"". Jim Hickinbotham (Rabid Wolf, Choctaw). Retrieved not recorded. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= and |year= (help); Cite has empty unknown parameters: |coauthors= and |month= (help); External link in |publisher= (help)
• Talbert, Paul (2006-05-01). ""SkEba'kst: The Lake People and Seward Park"". The History of Seward Park. SewardPark.org. Retrieved 2006-06-06. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameters: |coauthors= and |month= (help)

Further reading

• "American Indians - Native Americans: A Note on Terminology", Peter d'Errico (22 August 2002), NativeWeb.org.
  Condensed version of d'Errico (2005)
• "Native American Indian Studies - A Note on Names", Peter d'Errico (11 July 2005), Legal Studies Department, University of Massachusetts. References provided.
• "What's in a Name? Indians and Political Correctness", Christina Berry (12 July 2006), All Things Cherokee.

(The above are also listed bibliographic references.)

• Hickinbotham, Jim (2000-12-16 updated). ""A Testimony to the Survival of Original Peoples [...]"". Retrieved 2006-08-06. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Cite has empty unknown parameters: |coauthors= and |month= (help)
  "Trails" section heading is a table of contents to people and sources related to the naming controversy. (Not neutral point of view, but provides good leads.)

First Nations governments