Confederation Iroquois - Research Paper Example

Confederation Iroquois The Iroquois confederacy is regarded as one of oldest democracies in the world. It is also known as the Five Nations or Iroquois League which later became the Six Nations. To this end, the Iroquois Confederacy was political term in reference to the political cooperation that existed between five Iroquois nations in north-eastern area of United States (Fenton, 112). These nations included the Oneida, Cayuga, Mohawk, Oondaga, and Seneca. Later in 1722 they were joined by the Tuscarora and henceforth recognized as the six nations by the English. The residents of the six villages referred to themselves as “people of the longhouse.” Furthermore, the Iroquois Confederacy was united by race since they were drawn from the Indian tribes. Evidently, the Iroquois Confederacy has elicited much interest from an archaeological perspective. This has largely been due to the comparative analysis of the various artefacts from the different villages that offer insight into the social and political influence on the human material culture over the course of time. Prior to the establishment of the Confederacy, all of the founding nations were bitter nations who fought each other. To this end, the historical literature of the Iroquois reveals that leaders know as Dekanawidah also known as the Peacemaker came to the nations preaching peace and unity(Fenton, 112). In this regard, the Dekanawidah was assisted by the Hiawatha in persuading the entire five nation to embrace the ‘Great Law of Peace.’ Consequently, a government known as the Iroquois Confederacy was established. The government promoted peace, respect and cooperation in work among all the nations. Evidently, the Confederacy had been in existence even before the European exploration began in North America. Moreover, the Tuscarora nation migrated from the Southern homeland to join the Iroquois Confederacy in 1702due to European settlement. The Iroquois Confederacy operated under the clan system which ensured peace and cooperation among them. To this end, the clans derived their names from one of land, water or air animals. Moreover, each clan was constituted by at least two nations and three clans were constituents of a segment of every nation. The Iroquois society was set up under a matrilineal heritage by the Dekanawidah or Peacemaker. To this end, the members of a clan tracked their ancestors and family members through their mothers. In this regard, there was a common female ancestor within each clan set up consistent with a group of families. Moreover, a man moved into the female’s longhouse once they were married. The longhouses were housing shelters for members of the same clan(Fenton, 114). Children conceived by both parents were henceforth members of the mother’s clan. In this regard, all the members of the same clan regarded each other as family and therefore did not intermarry. The longhouses played a pertinent role in the governance of the Iroquois Confederacy. To this end, apart from housing clan members, the longhouses acted as meeting venues. In this regard, the women and men assembled in different groups to discuss pertinent events, issues as well as offering advice to the leaders. There were different roles associated with all the members of the Iroquois Confederacy. Foremost, the children often listened in to the various discussions undertaken in the longhouses. In this regard, the art of listening enabled them to learn about the issues affecting them as well as the skills involved in decision making. Women and men held positions of importance in the Iroquois Confederacy and the children were groomed into these roles once they grew up. The issues affecting women were articulated through two major avenues. These were the Clan mothers and the women councils. The most respectable and oldest women within the clans were known as the Clan Members. The position was hereditary and passed down across generations. Their roles pertained to maintenance of balance and harmony within the nations and clans. They equally assumed responsibility over the clan’s welfare. Furthermore, they were charged with selecting the male leaders of the male leaders known as the Hoyaneh (Fenton, 112). The Clan mothers had the authority to replace the Hoyaneh in the event that he failed to put the needs of the clan first. The Men’s council and Women’s council were charged with advising the Clan Mother’s who then offered advice to the Hoyaneh. The Women’s councils were responsible with developing consensus on important issues before advising the clan mothers. The men voiced their opinions through the Hoyaneh and the Men’s councils. To this end, the Hoyaneh also known as “Caretakers of the Peace,” represented the male leaders within each of the nations that constituted the Iroquois Confederacy. In this regard, there were a number of Hoyaneh in each nation and they were chosen and received advice from the Clan Mothers. The decision undertaken by the Hoyaneh pertained to national affairs when they met together. To this end, they employed consensus in crafting the way forward. The Grand Council was the highest level of the clan’s representation by the Hoyaneh. On the other hand, the Men’s council was composed of all the men in a clan. Their role pertained to developing consensus over an issue of concern and advising the Clan Mothers. The Grand Council was the highest level of governance within the Iroquois Confederacy. In this regard, their discussions centred on the entire Confederacy. Examples of issues discussed included decisions to engage in war, trade agreement and peace treaties. It was composed of 50 Hoyaneh drawn from each nation of the entire Confederacy(Fenton, 115). Discussion of issues was conducted in a set order and the decisions arrived at were unanimous through consensus. Evidently, the Peacemaker had established the number of Hoyaneh needed for each nation. In this regard, there was different number of Hoyaneh who represented each nation. However, all the nations were equal in the decision making process. The Clan Mothers also attended to Grand Council to ensure that the Hoyaneh represented the clan issues as they had been advised. Articles of Confederation The Article of Confederation led to the creation of the first unifying and unitary government structure for the thirteen American states that engaged in war during the American Revolution. The Articles of Confederation went into force on 1st March, 1781 until 4th March 1789. Consequently, it only lasted for eight years. Evidently, the onset of the war which was precipitated by Great Britain found each of the states operating separately as a nation. In this regard, each state was operating under its own government and constitution. Consequently, the residents of the each individual state regarded it as their own country. The founders of the articles of Confederation espoused a unitary national government which would unify the states and forge a unitary for during the American Revolution(Dougherty, 73). Furthermore, they sought a unitary government which could control trade; reconcile conflicts within the states, as well as fostering international relations with the rest of the world. In organizing the national government, the founders of the Articles of Confederation were in agreement that all the states should operate under one central government. Moreover, the articles sought to maintain the sovereignty, independence, power, rights and freedom of each member state. In this regard, all the member states were inherently independent but only united in the general welfare, common security and defence of liberties. To this effect, the articles of Confederation sought to create a weak national government as opposed to a strong one. This was made possible through the sole creation of a legislature with exemptions to the judicial and executive systems. Furthermore, the Articles of Confederation ensured a weak congress characterized by minimal and limited powers. Moreover, the central government exercised minimal authority over the member states. The states were also granted the power to approve every piece of legislative action. The votes in Congress were limited to one for each state whereby nine states had to be in consensus. To this effect, the seven smaller states were unable to outvote six larger states pertaining to any issue in Congress. The national government under the Articles of Confederation witnessed several achievements during its enforcement. Foremost, the national government was successful in its independence war against Great Britain. The national government also successfully negotiated the Treaty of Paris(Dougherty, 67). In effect, the Treaty of Paris was a peace treaty that culminated to the end of the American Revolution. It equally offered provisions which required that each state to accord recognition of each other’s laws. For example, it enabled free travel across the states; any marriage within the states was legal and validly recognized in other states; criminal offenders who evaded justice through crossing state borders could be taken back to face justice in the original state of crime. The Northwest Ordinance of 1787 was also another achievement of the national government under the Articles of Confederation (Dougherty, 67). Evidently, the ordinance gave the right for organizing individual governments to people of the north-western regions. To this end, they had similar rights as the original thirteen states to the Confederation. The Northwest Ordinance also guaranteed the right of free public education to children. It also made slavery illegal and provided for freedom of worship to the citizens of the member states. In addition, the Ordinance provided for the right to trial by a jury in accordance to the set process of law. It is pertinent to note that Articles of Confederation had a short tenure of eight years due to several problems and flaws that were evident during it effect. Foremost, there was a lack of financial reserves for the Congress since they had no authority in raising money through taxes. Furthermore, there was a resistance by the states to pay any taxes. This was more so evident during the Shays Rebellion of 1786 to 1787. Evidently, it was an uprising led by Daniel Shay in western Massachusetts. His followers were largely small scale farmers who were annoyed by the exorbitant taxes and debt. Evidently, the defaulting in paying debts always meant imprisonment for the debtors. To this end, Daniel Shay ignited a rebellion on 29th August 1786 which was raised as private army. The main Shaysite force was consequently defeated by the Massachusetts militia. The lack of any national government response to the Massachusetts uprising led to widespread lobbying for re-evaluation of the articles of Confederation. The weak government also meant that the Congress did not possess any authority over the citizens of states as well as their governments. To this end, the citizens of the states did not obey nor comply with the laws. The national government equally was denied the authority to make people obey the law. There was also failure in honouring the agreements of the Treaty of Paris. To this effect, there was an outright resistance to pay back the money owed to the Loyalists as well as denial in return back their property. The Congress also had difficulty to derive cooperation in trade agreement by their member states with other international nations. For example, the member states absconded from paying for imported items. To this end, there was reluctance by foreign countries to engage in trade with the United States. Further problems in the Articles of Confederation pertained to failure of authority by the Congress in regulating inter-state trade. This was evident from the exorbitant taxation of goods moving from one state to another state. Consequently, trade was rendered impossible. The citizens of the member states were equally convinced that their property rights were being violated since the states offered no protection to their property rights. Furthermore, the states were guilty of forming factions that propagated their interests of certain groups. Moreover, the states were guilty of ignoring minority rights. They equally did not offer protection to the properties of all their citizens. The re-evaluation of the Articles of Confederation was largely contributed by the Shay’s Rebellion. Evidently, the calls of re-evaluation were justified due to a variety of reasons. These included the growing discontent expressed against the Confederation through the spread of violent outbreaks. To this effect, delegates drafted a report addressed to Congress. The purpose of the report was to request a joint convention for all the states. Consequently, the Congress sent out invitations for delegates to attend a convention in Philadelphia whose main agenda was to revise the Articles of Confederation. In effect, the convention paved the way for the establishment of a Constitutional process in 1787 that culminated into the United States Constitution. Comparison between the Iroquois confederacy and the Articles of Confederation The Iroquois Confederacy is credited with influencing the Articles of Confederation. According to Grinde and Johansen, the Iroquois Confederacy influenced the formation of the Articles of Confederation in two pertinent ways. Foremost, it was influenced through the ideas and advice by Iroquois leaders who interacted directly with the founders of the Articles of Confederation. The second means was through exemplary force of observation by the American political leader pertaining to Iroquois political practices. To this end, the observations played a pertinent role in the crafting of models that were used in designing a contemporary system of government. Evidently, a distinct and unique American political philosophy was created through the participation of eminent personalities in a number of treaties by the Iroquois Confederacy. There were various differences in the governance structures between the Iroquois Confederacy and government enshrined in the Articles of Confederation. To this end, The Great Law of Peace enshrined a confederation among the five Indian nations. These were the Mohawaks and Senecas who constituted the ‘older brothers’ and the Oneidas and Cayugas who constituted the ‘younger brothers.’ In this regard, they were the first and second house of Congress respectively. In the event that there was disagreements between the younger and older brothers, executive power was held by the Onondagas. To this end, the Onondagas had authority of the final decision over disputes. However, in the event that the Onondagas did not reach a consensual agreement, they reffered it back for review to the brothers. Consequently, if the four tribes reached a consensus, the decision was final. On the other hand, the national government under the Articles of Confederation had no structures for executive power as most of it was weakened. To this end, the resolutions of disputes such as violent rebellions were had to control due to lack of a detailed institutional process. One similarity pertained to the basis of dual citizenship. To this end, the Great Law governing the Iroquois confederacy offered provisions for dual citizenship without restrictions on the basis of nationality or race. Similarly, the Articles of Association allowed for freedom of movement within the states without restrictions on the basis of nationality or race. Further similarities between the Iroquois Confederacy and the Articles of Confederation pertained to the limited powers of the central government. In this regard, the Grand Council symbolized the central government under the Iroquois Confederacy. Consequently, the Grand Council was limited in its functions pertaining to internal affairs of a tribe. This was in tandem with the spirit of upholding the doctrine of sovereignty of each member nation and recognition of the unique issues affecting each tribe. To this end, the Grand Council expressed restraint in interfering with the internal issues affecting each tribe. Similarly, the national government under the ‘Articles of Confederation’ espoused sovereignty of each state and had no authority in interfering with each of their internal affairs. To this end, the Iroquios Confederacy and the Grand Council were mutually similar in terms of the provision of a central government with limited authority and autonomous local governments among its member nations. The Grand council of the Iroquois confederacy and the central government of the Articles of Confederation also exhibited similarities pertaining to the role of negotiating for peace time treaties. For example, the Treaty of Paris paved the way the end of the war for independence with Great Britain. On the other hand, the Iroquois had a successful peace treaty known as the ‘Two Row Wampum Treaty.’ The treaty was formulated on the first encounter between the Iroquois Confederacy and the Europeans. To this end, the treaty proposed by the Iroquois was founded on three core values. These were, peace, friendship and mutual respect. The most notable difference of the Grand Council and the national government under the Articles of Confederation was in relation of representation of community interest. Evidently, the major of the Hoyaneh pertained to placing of community interest first. In this function, the Hoyaneh performed this duty after being advised accordingly by the Clan Mothers. The Hoyaneh was charged with carefully articulating the needs of his tribal community while the Clan Mothers conducted supervision over them. In this regard, if the Hoyaneh consistently avoided articulating the community issues as advised, the clan mothers had the authority to replace him. On the other hand, the national government under the Articles of Confederation was accused by citizens of the states for violation of their rights and favouritism. The citizens of the member states were convinced that their property rights were being violated. This was largely due to the lack of protection of property rights by the state. Furthermore, the states were guilty of forming factions that propagated their interests of certain groups. Moreover, the states were guilty of ignoring minority rights. They equally did not offer protection to the properties of all their citizens. In effect, the national government under the articles of association failed in representing the rights of the community. References Dougherty, Keith L.. Collective action under the Articles of Confederation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2001. Print. Fenton, William N.. The great law and the Longhouse: a political history of the Iroquois Confederacy. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 20101998. Print. Read More