Lucia Reyes ’29 is a prospective psychology major and creative writing minor. She enjoys writing, reading, playing The Sims, and listening to the rock and indie music. On campus, she is involved in Best Buddies, Cheese Club, and Oriental Tea Club. Contact her at lareyes@wm.edu.
The views expressed in the article are the author’s own.
In 2020, the College of William and Mary worked with local Indigenous peoples to develop a Land Acknowledgment statement. The statement represents an important step toward recognizing Indigenous peoples, but its misapplication renders it frequently performative.
“William & Mary acknowledges the Indigenous peoples who are the original inhabitants of the lands our campus is on today — the Cheroenhaka (Nottoway), Chickahominy, Eastern Chickahominy, Mattaponi, Monacan, Nansemond, Nottoway, Pamunkey, Patawomeck, Upper Mattaponi, and Rappahannock tribes — and pay our respect to their tribal members past and present,” reads the College’s website.
When used in relevant contexts, the statement serves as a reminder that the history of the College is intertwined with Indigenous history and displacement. For example, the Land Acknowledgement prefaces Opening Convocation, Commencement and the Provost’s New Faculty Welcome. The statement’s integration into speeches about the College situates its connection to Indigenous communities as something fundamental and important.
However, when the statement is used in contexts where it does not feel relevant, it instead comes off as performative. For example, the statement is printed on the Office of Residence Life and the Office of Sustainability’s webpages and read at Someone You Know training. It is listed on the website of William and Mary High School Model United Nations, an undergraduate-run conference and on the website of the Innovative Library Classroom, another conference hosted by the College. In these places, the Land Acknowledgement is brought up only to be quickly dismissed. Visitors to the Office of Residence Life and the Office of Sustainability’s webpages scroll past the statement to find the information they are looking for; the Someone You Know training transitions to focus on sexual violence immediately after the reading of the Acknowledgement. When it does not appear relevant to the subject at hand, the College’s Land Acknowledgement exists simply to fulfill a requirement of political correctness and, ultimately, to be dismissed.
This is not to say that Indigenous issues have no relevance to Residence Life, sustainability, sexual violence or the rest of the topics mentioned above. If the Land Acknowledgement was accompanied by discussion of how Indigenous peoples are connected to the topics above, the acknowledgement could be one part of a larger effort to raise awareness of Indigenous concerns. The Someone You Know training could include information about the increased sexual violence risks faced by Indigenous women. The Office of Residence Life could discuss how they support Indigenous students or remind residents about the history of the land they are living on. The Office of Sustainability could bring up how Indigenous land practices relate to their work. The bottom line is that in order for the Land Acknowledgement to be meaningful, it must be part of a larger effort to educate students about, and connect with, the Indigenous community. Unfortunately, the College presents the Land Acknowledgment not as a first step, but as an end.
The College’s webpage about the acknowledgement reads, “Acknowledgement promotes awareness of and respect for Indigenous culture, ending the history of silence and exclusion that has resulted in Indigenous disadvantages today.”
This is a problematic statement. Acknowledgment alone cannot possibly end the long history of prejudice that has led to Indigenous disadvantages. This is especially true when acknowledgement is brief and does not lead to meaningful discussion.
The College’s treatment of the Indigenous community is uniquely important because its history is deeply intertwined with that of Indigenous peoples, and not always in a flattering way.
During the first half of the 18th century, the College was home to the Brafferton School, which gave Indigenous boys an English and Christian education. Hesitant Indigenous leaders were incentivized to send their children to the school in exchange for not having to pay yearly tribute to Virginia, and were also coerced using military power.
Additionally, the College has a history of caricaturing Indigenous peoples. In 1916, the College’s sports teams adopted the logo of an Indigenous man carrying a tomahawk and knife. From the late 1930s to 1942, a pony with a rider in Indigenous clothing was used as a mascot at sports games. From the 1960s to 1970s, the College used a Indigenous caricature as a logo. In 1978, the College’s logo became “WM” with two feathers. In 2006, the National Collegiate Athletic Association forced the College to do away with this logo because of the feathers, a decision the College tried to appeal.
Indigenous history — and exploitation — is inextricably connected to the history of the College, so outreach to Indigenous communities and discussion of Indigenous issues should be equally connected to the College’s present.
The College has made efforts to achieve this goal and has partnered extensively with Indigenous communities. The Brafferton Legacy Group, composed of Indigenous alumni affiliated with the tribes whose children attended Brafferton, was formed to advise the College, honor the Indigenous people who attended Brafferton and reach out to others historically connected to Brafferton. The Muscarelle commissioned Indigenous artists and displayed artifacts from Brafferton. The Native Studies minor was formed to connect students with Indigenous history and culture. The College has hosted speakers discussing Indigenous issues, as well as a delegation from Indigenous tribes. The American Indian Research Center works to expand knowledge about Indigenous culture and history and engages with descendant communities. In recognition of the 2025 Indigenous Peoples day, the College is hosting an Indigenous People’s Feast focusing on sustainable practices. The College is also currently working with Virginia tribes to create a plan for repatriating human remains and cultural objects.
This is only a fraction of the work the College has done to center Indigenous groups and further Indigenous research. But the performative use of the Land Acknowledgment does not highlight or contribute to this effort.
In contexts not about the College as a whole, the Land Acknowledgement should either not be presented, or should be thoroughly connected to the matter at hand. Additionally, instead of hailing the Land Acknowledgement as a solution to Indigenous erasure, the College should highlight the tangible actions it has taken to increase Indigenous visibility and emphasize that the work is ongoing.
Rather than meaninglessly centering the Land Acknowledgement, if the College and its organizations instead emphasize relevant research, advocacy and service, the Land Acknowledgement can shine as one part of a campus that is deeply connected with the Indigenous community.
Correction (11/6/2025): An earlier version of this article contained an error, citing an event conducted by the Theoretical Archaeology Group (TAG) as the website of William and Mary’s Tag Day. Mentions of William and Mary’s Tag Day and the link to the TAG event have been removed as Tag Day, hosted by Students for University Advancement, is not associated with the linked website or its contents.
