Acting on a recommendation from the Human Rights Commission (HRC), the Board of Selectmen (BOS) approved a process for modifying the display of the “Whitfield documents” exhibited at Town Hall, which include a copy of the sale agreement by which early colonists acquired the land that is now Guilford from indigenous people living here.

The initiative began when Guilford resident Barry Felson reached out to First Selectman Matt Hoey this summer requesting that the documents be removed entirely from Town Hall and placed in a museum. That sparked further discussion, according to town officials, which resulted in a referral to the HRC, which held two public meetings on the issue this fall.

The agreement reached after these broader conversations that included Felson and other members of the community was that HRC will add supplemental, educational material to be displayed alongside the Whitfield documents, drafted in concert with input from local indigenous people.

“I applaud the HRC for coming to the decision they made. I think it’s very reasonable and well reasoned response,” Hoey said.

Final approval of a new display, which will definitely remain in Town Hall, according to HRC Chair Jo Keogh, still falls to the BOS. Likely the additional material will consist of one or two other supporting documents framed alongside the original material, which themselves are reproductions of the actual documents signed back in the mid-1600s.

Keogh told the Courier that she was also very happy with this arrangement, and that the goal is not to hide or erase any history but rather to provide a more nuanced and contextual depiction of the town’s origins, and also add a perspective that is not often available in the history of colonization.

“Our primary charge...is to be an educational body, and so whenever we’re given an opportunity like this to expand awareness and education around issues, in this case pertaining to the indigenous population of Guilford...we feel that it’s really important to do that,” she said.

Felson in his original letter to Hoey called for the documents to be removed entirely, focusing specifically on the unfairness and what he characterized as likely exploitation of the Menunkatuck tribe, who occupied this land in the 17th century when European colonists arrived.

“We generally put things on the wall that we’re proud of (or, in the case of historical museums like the Holocaust Museum, that horrify us),” Felson wrote. “It’s time to take this document off the wall at Town Hall and, since I’m trying to confront history and not rewrite it, consign it to a place like Whitfield House or the historical room of the library where it might be more appropriate.”

Back in October, Keogh reached out to town historian Joel Helander, who provided an extensive context for these early interactions between indigenous folks and the colonizers who founded modern Guilford. Helander wrote that a “preponderance of evidence” shows that tribal leaders knew what they were doing when they signed the agreement, and that the transaction was “fair and equitable.”

“[The documents] should remain in place for the public at large to study, hopefully appreciate, and interpret in their own way,” he wrote.

Helander also noted that the agreement has not been disputed in subsequent centuries, as have many other treaties between colonizers and indigenous people in Connecticut over the years, though because the Quinnipiac (the tribe that originally lived in Guilford) are not recognized by the state or federal government, it is not clear that they would be able to do so.

But Helander also acknowledged that the indigenous people in Guilford likely didn’t have the same concept of land ownership as the Europeans did, while also noting that negotiations were “hardly executed in isolation” with leaders of other neighboring tribes and groups involved in the process.

One of the HRC’s members, Eric MacDonald, is a member of the Schaghticoke Tribe which is based in northwestern Connecticut. Keogh said that along with a western or White historical context, she hoped that MacDonald could help draft a document that will give visitors a very different perspective: how native people see this kind of transaction.

“I’m sure this is going to take some time and some effort, but we’re really hoping it will be an educational tool that really sparks some thought and maybe some conversation about these really important documents,” she said.

The specifics of that will be hammered out by HRC members likely headed by MacDonald, who Keogh said will likely speak directly to other tribal members as well as leverage tools and resources that indigenous people have for marking and understanding history.

“Something that’s really important for us at HRC is making sure that marginalized people who have not necessarily tended to have a voice are given the opportunity to share their perspective at this point,” she said.

Keogh also pushed back against the idea propagated by some in town that HRC’s mission is to censor or serve as a gatekeeper of history or facts in any way, specifically noting that the BOS has to approve any changes or initiatives like this one.

“We’re trying to add information, add context to discussions, not strip it away,” she said.