Office of the Chancellor

What does the name Bancroft mean to you?
I am a descendant of Mariano Guadalupe Vallejo. I have read of the relationship between Vallejo and Bancroft and that Vallejo used his networks and credibility to enable interviews of Californios for Bancroft’s collection. I understand the bulk of Vallejo’s personal papers are preserved in the UC Berkeley Bancroft Library. His name had meant support for my lineage and as a student at UC Berkeley in the 60’s, the building held a public place of honor to me.

What does the name Hubert Howe Bancroft mean to you? How have Hubert Howe Bancroft's efforts enriched and/or harmed you or the communities you represent?
I understand that HHB has put forth white supremacist ideas in his writings that have been very harmful to many communities. I can relate to the harm done because of what my own ancestor has said and done. I have read books about my great, great grandfather’s life, General Mariano Vallejo, to better understand the origins and history of my family in California. I refer to the Napa Historical Society’s published essays that my great grandfather Platon Mariano Guadalupe Vallejo, M.D.( Memoirs of the Vallejos, 1994) wrote because it reflects the attitudes of my ancestors through their lens of racial supremacy and conqueror/ colonizers dominance. I know that MGH Vallejo was the Mexican Director of Colonization here in Northern California and was an enslaver of the local Indigenous tribes on his ranchos and that he sponsored an early California state law that allowed the continuation of that slavery and extermination of local Indigenous with bounty paid for their body parts and endenturing and enslaving of their children to white families.

I have looked at the legacy of my lineage from Vallejo, which contains white supremacy, patriarchy, and enslavement. It has been a journey of truth-telling for me and a renunciation of the ideologies and actions of my ancestors. I do not want this history to use my name for credibility or honoring. I am offering my help to local Indigenous to change the name of Mt Diablo, with which Vallejo is associated in the early 1800s.

I feel the burden and harm done in my name by my ancestors and am committed to balancing and repairing that legacy. Because of that endeavor, I would support changing any public building/monument/geographic point that is currently named after people whose ideologies and actions have participated in the state’s history of racial genocide and enslavement.

What are some foreseeable opportunities and challenges with reckoning with Hubert Howe Bancroft's legacy?
I see the opportunity to educate students and the public on the origins of our state and its participation in genocide and enslavement. The challenge is to create a consciousness change, a heart expansion of our California people.

What recommendations do you have regarding outcomes and actions for this committee to consider?
I support the change of the name of the building of the library from Bancroft to a more neutral one. I support the insights of my friend and sister descendent of early Californians, Kim Bancroft, as I know her as an expert on her history in California, but also a woman of conscience and tender heart, whose guidance I trust implicitly.

Do you have any additional feedback to share with the committee?
I grasp that this history is a part of me, I embody it, including the perpetrations and violence and horrific ideologies. Given my position in this family history, I fear that I have passed on what I have inherited to my children and my future progeny, even as I have tried to break the intergenerational cycle of repressive ideologies, it is heart-breaking for me.

I stand for truth-telling of what caused and is still causing pain, wounds, trauma and death, right here in the San Francisco Bay Area where my family still lives. I stand up for the nurturing, caring and compassionate person that our Creator has called me to be. I stand for life-giving and for all of our world and universe’s well being. I stand for those beliefs in the reality of our world today, which includes tangibly, the renaming of the Bancroft Library. 

What does the name Bancroft mean to you?
Bancroft means the special collections library at UC Berkeley housing, among other important collections, the most comprehensive collection of original source material relating to the history of California and the West. It also means a monumental set of books documenting the research collected by Hubert Howe Bancroft and the team of researchers he assembled.

What does the name Hubert Howe Bancroft mean to you? How have Hubert Howe Bancroft's efforts enriched and/or harmed you or the communities you represent?
Hubert Howe Bancroft was a San Francisco printer and bookseller who set about to collect and preserve the history of California and the West and to publish the results of that effort in a monumental set of books that even now remains the most authoritative history of the region.

What are some foreseeable opportunities and challenges with reckoning with Hubert Howe Bancroft's legacy?
The question relates to the revelation of his disappointing racist opinions. The best way to neutralize or reckon with than aspect of HHB is to show, through exhibits, the rich and powerful impact of those felt were inferior - a way to prove his opinions were wrong.

What recommendations do you have regarding outcomes and actions for this committee to consider?
Do nothing to separate the name Bancroft from the library as it would risk losing the library's instant name recognition among donors and researchers. Instead, encourage the library to show how all racial and ethnic groups have enriched California and all of America.

Do you have any additional feedback to share with the committee?
My first encounter with The Bancroft Library was around 1950 when a van holding a mobile exhibit of artifacts held by the Library stopped in my town so school children like me could view them as a way to connect with California history. Over time, I learned that Bancroft engaged a crew of workers to document the history of the West through research, observations and oral histories and then used their work to publish a monumental set of history books about the West. I also learned that he sold his collection of books and research material to UCB and that his collections form the nucleus of The Bancroft Library. As an undergraduate, I used The Bancroft Library to research my ancestors who came overland to California in 1846 and planted the first commercial vineyard in the Napa Valley. More recently I used its collection of Thomas O. Larkin Correspondence to research portions of my own book Hawaii Foreign Mail to 1870. I have chaired the Friends of the Bancroft Library Council three separate times, plus I was president of the (then named) Boalt Hall Alumni Association in the 1980s and later I was a trustee of the UC Berkeley Foundation.

Despite decades of being a user of The Bancroft Library’s collections, a donor, a volunteer, and a close observer, I only recently learned of HHB’s racist opinions. Although disappointing to read, his opinions aren't particularly surprising, considering they were widely held by his generation, including by leading national politicians and, I'm sorry to say, even by my parents. The collections HHB sold to UCB have grown in size and scope and have gained an international reputation for excellence in scholarship. Its reputation rests on the importance of its holdings of Western America plus other acquired collections and on the scholarship of its staff and users. HHB's personal opinions play no part in the formation, importance or use of the collections; nor is the Library renowned as a bastion for promoting his personal views. So the question is do we gain anything now by airing HHB's racist opinions to justify removing the Bancroft name and, in the process, lose The Bancroft Library's world-wide name association with the vast collections that attract scholars and donors from around the world? Trying to ignore or hide the reality of our racist history by removing the tracks left by people's names is neither honest, nor practical, nor edifying, nor helpful toward ending racism.

Tackling racism through, for example, exhibiting how America's many races and ethnicities have each contributed to its rich society is a positive way to reckon with and end racism. I am saddened to learn of HHB's racism but we honor him for his dedication to history and scholarship. I am proud to do so.

What does the name Bancroft mean to you?
Its ubiquity throughout the East Bay signifies the considerable cultural contribution made by HH Bancroft.

What does the name Hubert Howe Bancroft mean to you? How have Hubert Howe Bancroft's efforts enriched and/or harmed you or the communities you represent?
The name Hubert Howe Bancroft brings to my mind his massive literary contribution to California history. His library, named for him IN PERPETUITY, is a testament to that contribution. Mr. Howe's efforts have only enriched the communities in which I formerly lived.

What are some foreseeable opportunities and challenges with reckoning with Hubert Howe Bancroft's legacy?
There is, and will be, blowback to retaining his name on the library. So be it! Erasure of his name is not the answer, but perhaps an explanatory (not exculpatory) plaque could be provided at the entrance to the library.

Do you have any additional feedback to share with the committee?
As an academic institution of stellar repute, Cal should uphold the original behest. Period.

What does the name Bancroft mean to you?
A highly respected library.

What does the name Hubert Howe Bancroft mean to you? How have Hubert Howe Bancroft's efforts enriched and/or harmed you or the communities you represent?
He helped establish a world-class library.

What recommendations do you have regarding outcomes and actions for this committee to consider?
Use the name to teach history, not to erase it. Whitewashing history is not how we can learn from it. Those who don’t learn history, if you will remember, are doomed to repeat it.

Do you have any additional feedback to share with the committee?
George Washington was a slave owner. Should we rename the nation's capital and the state?

What does the name Bancroft mean to you?
A complex individual who spent much of his fortune acquiring a library indispensable for my own work.

Do you have any additional feedback to share with the committee?
The admonition by an itinerant rabbi that “He who is without sin should cast the first stone” given to a mob about to stone to death a woman charged with adultery remains as relevant today as when he uttered those words 2000 years ago. How will future generations — if there are any — judge our own for wrecking their planet by maintaining the fossil fuel-powered comforts with its concomitant waste to which we have all become accustomed? How can we ourselves judge complex individuals of the past such as Bancroft, Teddy Roosevelt, John Muir, or Thomas Jefferson without acknowledging that we, too, sin every day oblivious that we are doing so even as we boast of our virtue and enlightenment relative to their benightedness?

I spent two of the happiest years of my life as a Bancroft Fellow in the 1990s as I worked on my dissertation which became the best-selling book Imperial San Francisco: Urban Power, Earthly Ruin (UC Press, 1999.) In it, I quoted some of Bancroft’s racist and bellicose statements, but I also remained grateful to the outstanding library he built without which I could not have written my book and innumerable others theirs. I was especially grateful for the interviews Bancroft commissioned of 19th century moguls. The Bancroft’s Oral History Center founded by my friend Willa Baum continues that indispensable work today.

In his magisterial book The Past is a Foreign Country — Revisited (Cambridge, 2015), the erudite Berkeley-based geographer and historian David Lowenthal decried “presentism,” the imposition of today’s mutable values onto those of a largely unknowable past. Though we may abhor the racism of that past, those of us who have spent a great deal of time with its popular media understand how nearly impossible it would have been for most to free themselves of ubiquitous stereotypes in that alien country.

In a time of multiple existential crises, I am saddened to see my Alma Mater devoting significant resources to researching and attempting to expunge the perceived crimes of those such as Hubert Howe Bancroft and Bishop George Berkeley. To quote again that rabbi, “Judge not, that ye not be judged.

What does the name Bancroft mean to you?
synonymous with an extraordinary library collection

What does the name Hubert Howe Bancroft mean to you? How have Hubert Howe Bancroft's efforts enriched and/or harmed you or the communities you represent?
It has had no impact on me personally.

What are some foreseeable opportunities and challenges with reckoning with Hubert Howe Bancroft's legacy?
I have some difficulty with the use of the word ""reckoning"". It implies an initial judgement that some type of action must be taken.

What recommendations do you have regarding outcomes and actions for this committee to consider?
You are addressing extraordinarily sensitive questions, but I think the committee has a terrific opportunity to provide a context for many of these nuanced issues. The existence of the collection of historic materials contained in the Bancroft Library is an invaluable asset to the University, whose value cannot be emphasized enough. I am fully aware of the complexity of the controversy surrounding Bancroft because I have read all 39 of the volumes contained in ""Bancroft's Works"".

Bancroft was the principal author of only 6 of the volumes, although he contributed to at least a portion of 11 others. Nevertheless, because he insisted on being characterized as the author of all of the Works, I feel he must bear responsibility for the language in every volume. The bottom line is that Bancroft did not hesitate to use very strong language, which abuses many subjects in racist and other extremely negative terms. I feel this fact makes it absolutely necessary for the library to provide a context for the demeaning language that is utilized throughout the volumes. It cannot be dealt with in a way which would provide any obfuscation of the harsh reality of that language.

Despite these facts, I feel that the Bancroft name should remain on the library as a reflection on the collection itself, which he played the essential role in launching, enhancing and preserving for the ages an invaluable collection which was conveyed to the University of California at a very advantageous price. The value of this library to the University simply can't be measured too highly. Without Bancroft, it simply wouldn't have existed.

Do you have any additional feedback to share with the committee?
1. My understanding is that the terms of sale of the library address not only the price, but the fact that the collection would be named in perpetuity The Bancroft Library. I think that is a relevant factor in your decision, but in no way should it prevent you from providing an essential, straight-forward analysis of the facts and contexts surrounding Bancroft's writings in a prominent position, near the entrance of the library.

2. I call your attention to Volumes 36 and 37 (Popular Tribunals I & II). I feel these volumes (essentially written entirely by Bancroft), reflect his academic skills. He was more than a mere collector and the strength of his opinions add value to the historic record regardless of your perspective on his opinions.

Dear Members of the Bancroft Reckoning Committee,

I have completed reading HH Bancroft’s autobiography, ""Literary Industries: Chasing a Vanishing West"", in which he talks about his dream of building a library for the people of California. He built that dream, and that dream is now the Bancroft Library on our Cal Campus. There can be no debate that It remains one of the most exceptional gifts ever given to the crown jewel of our library system. He was a bibliophile, and the library was his life’s endeavor, not merely a check dashed off as are so many gifts.

From his autographical writings, please allow me to introduce the man to you by way of some of his own words: a man you will not know if your focus is solely on his racist tirades. Yes, he uttered those contemptable words, yet like most scholars and historians, he was a man of considerable complexity and texture. Some of his following comments might surprise you.

Bancroft’s motivation for collecting his library and dedicating it to future historians and thinkers is crystalized in his autobiography by these plain-spoken comments to the historical twin requisites of truth and justice,

“At the outset in my writing, I was determined that no power on earth should sway me from telling the truth. I should do all parties and sects justice, according to the evidence, whatsoever pandemonium of criticism or unpopularity such a course might lead me.” (page 185)

“When the time comes, California and the commonwealths around, up and down this Pacific seaboard, will be a seat of culture and power to which all roads shall lead.” (page 88)

Bancroft did not obfuscate the racism of his time, contrary to what some of his critics have said. Speaking about his five-volume writings on Aboriginal Americans, Bancroft reflects in respectful and inquisitive tones while acknowledging the racist genocide inflicted by European settlers:

“It was my purpose to lay before the world absolutely all that was known of these people at the time of the appearing among them of their European exterminators. The myths of these peoples, their strange conceptions of their origin, their deities, and their future state, would present a much more perfect and striking picture placed together where they might the better be analyzed and compared.” (page 111)

Bancroft found repugnant the treatment of Aboriginal Americans by Oregon prospectors in the late 1840s when the two civilizations collided over land and river access. One such Oregonian, John England Ross, was interviewed by Bancroft about his experiences fighting the local tribes. Bancroft, sympathetic to the plight of the tribes, had the following reproachful comment about Ross after their interview,

“I sat through the night . . . taking the most disgusting dictation from the old Indian-butcher John E. Ross. This piece of folly I do not record with pleasure” (page 173)

He again acknowledges the issue of racism, this time in the context of Chinese immigrants, in his recording of history which is guided by the principal of impartiality and without fear of personal ostracism:

“In treating of the Chinese, a fair statement would satisfy neither one side nor the other. . . I must subject myself to the censure of both sides; at all events, as had been my invariable custom in regard to nationalities, and religions, social and political prejudices, I would not write for approbation of one side or the other.” (page 186)

Theses citations are but a few revealing the deeper man that few critics encounter or care to know. Yes, he wrote racist comments, but he never owned slaves nor expounded at length as though he embraced a racial view of white supremacy nor systematic censure of any race or ethnicity. He was, a 19th century scholar, born in 1832, at a time when racist words were common. Passing judgment on him in 2014 without his ability to respond to his accusers is morally and judicially improper.

Cultural norms, such as those we are addressing with Bancroft, are time and place dependent and in constant flux. Heraclitus of Ephesus, the fifth century ancient Greek philosopher, first observed this phenomenon of constant change in his often-quoted observation,

“No one steps in the same river twice, for it is not the same river and not the same person.”

To his point, HH Bancroft of the early 19th Century would surely be a different Bancroft were he living today, and we would surely know him differently. As he aged, Bancroft reflected philosophically as though channeling Heraclitus while rhetorically asking,

“Where is the man . . . absolutely perfect in his civilization? What we call civilization is not a fixed state, but an irresistible and eternal moving onward.” (page 111)

I propose that each member of the Reckoning Committee detach Bancroft’s racist comments from the gift he bestowed on our University. I concur with the Bancroft Library’s stated position on this tricky topic by endorsing the library’s current statement (see below) on Bancroft and the library bearing his name. Perhaps a reasonable compromise might be to leave the Bancroft name intact in all respects and place a plaque at the entry adopting the following admonition found on the Bancroft Library website:

The Library acknowledges the controversial legacy of Hubert Howe Bancroft whose writings and published works exhibit damaging and racist views, particularly against Indigenous, Asian, and African American communities. This section is not intended to glorify the man, but rather highlight the historical value and importance of the collection he amassed” (posted to the H.H. Bancroft Library website 9/20/2024)

What does the name Bancroft mean to you?
Since I am a great-great-granddaughter of H.H. Bancroft (HHB), the name, of course, has personal import, representing my family and our lived history of HHB, among other Bancrofts. Equally obviously, the name also represents for me the significant institution of The Bancroft Library, often referred to as “The Bancroft” or “Bancroft.” For most people, the name as “brand” surely represents those 60 million treasures held by the library and offering endless valuable opportunities for scholarly research and for journeys of self-discovery for those seeking information about their own families or communities.

What does the name Hubert Howe Bancroft mean to you? How have Hubert Howe Bancroft's efforts enriched and/or harmed you or the communities you represent?
Again, for me as a descendant of H.H. Bancroft, his name has personal resonance, but it also has several other manifestations. First, I grew up admiring the man for his many contributions to Western scholarship. His vision of “saving to the world a mass of material” from the newly developing Pacific West was an act of genius, followed by his hard work and generosity in collecting the 60,000 items that he and his agents created (as in oral histories or copied documents) or purchased in order to have the foundation of what is the Bancroft Library today. He himself paid his agents and clerks, and also bought the thousands of items found by scouring the whole West, Mexico, and Europe. The collection was originally valued at $250,000 in 1905 when U.C. Berkeley agreed to purchase it, but the University refused to pay the full price, so HHB, donated $100,000 in order to insure that the collection was duly paid for as valued. This genius and generosity make H.H. Bancroft an honored man.

On top of the 60,000 items HHB provided, over the last 120 years, the library’s curators and directors have also been visionary, and its donors generous, in continuing to build the collections in a huge variety of ways, reaching into every ethnic community among other communities, into visual arts, even into ancient Egypt, to provide a breadth of historical archives. These millions of artifacts have nothing to do with the founder, but rather have spun out from the ever widening gyre of his original vision.

However, H.H. Bancroft had his shadow side, as have had so many people honored with greatness over time. As a racist “man of his times,” Bancroft felt free to write and publish scurrilous analyses not only about people of color but even about the Irish, anyone not deemed “pure” according to the supremacist standards of the time (see his book ""Retrospection,"" 1912). I am loathe to repeat his most detestable passages (of which there are many). He may have been influenced by eugenicists. Sadly, as a reputable scholar and writer at the turn of the century when his book came out, Bancroft may also have influenced such thinkers. Words influence deeds.

But it has also been pointed out that because of Bancroft’s limited vision of a wider value in the human family, he also neglected to collect the stories and archives of some of the then more socially marginal groups, such as Jewish pioneers or Asian settlers or even many women, thus skewing the nature of his collection itself.

Indeed, much can be said both about the good works of H.H. Bancroft and about his heinous words and their impact. How to hold in balance the tension of these opposites, embrace this contradiction?

What are some foreseeable opportunities and challenges with reckoning with Hubert Howe Bancroft's legacy?
The biggest challenge is not taking a simple path to rectify wrongs without attempting to embrace the contradictions of this man, as with others like him. I don’t think we can “simply” wash away his guilt by saying “he was a man of his times,” since there were also men of his time who were seeking to overcome the vile stereotyping of Black, Mexican, Chinese and other people (certainly not perpetuate such stereotypes).

We must come to acknowledge the endemic history of white supremacy in the U.S. from our foundational colonial times to the very present. Millions of Americans said and did these terrible things, from those seeking to wipe out Native peoples to those claiming “Jews will not replace us.”

Now what? What can we learn from this history that will create more equity and justice in the present?

The opportunity here is to have many public discussions about the nature of this history and how we come to cope with it, whether it be HHB’s legacy or that of Kroeber or the numerous other public figures—local, national, and global—who confound us. How we have those discussions can actually be exciting for those seeking to move us all forward in understanding.

Finding a compromise on how to undo the harm that H.H. Bancroft’s words and deeds have left behind—that is a challenge, indeed.

What recommendations do you have regarding outcomes and actions for this committee to consider?
1) By way of compromise with those who find the name of Bancroft now unworthy of honoring a building, I think taking his name off the front of the building is an important gesture to acknowledge the impact of the past. Building names are visible signs of who we find worthy of exalting. Bancroft’s ugliest words sear the sensitive mind, no matter what color we are. If this be some “punishment” ironically handed down by history, so be it. Call it the History Library or the Doe Annex or some other name that does not, upon sight, remind UC Berkeley scholars and visitors of enduring racism.

2) Also by way of compromise, the “Bancroft Collection” itself should endure, with explanatory exhibits upon entering the library’s holdings. I suggest this name retention for several reasons. First, it would be a tremendous if not impossible challenge to change the names of 60 million items stamped with “The Bancroft Library,” along with multiples of the same name in catalogues, etc. To change all those names would, first of all, tax the staff, already suffering for years from recent fiscal impacts of downsizing budgets and personnel. But even were it financially possible to dedicate all the time and energy necessary for those changes, the need to do so is not reasonable. In balancing out the contradictions of looking at the good and the bad in the man who initiated this fantastic supply of information, we can work the compromise by understanding that some names of people and places in our society cannot be changed, in accordance with changing sentiments of the times, without deep disruption to the social fabric. As a society, we need to have the courage to change what we can, but also accept what we can’t change and instead learn to live with some aspects of the past. We continually have to acknowledge the past in many ways, and we need to have the psychological flexibility and even maturity to adapt. One example I use is that we are likely not going to change out our $1, $5, $10, and $20 bills just because the men featured on them were enslavers, or advocated that African Americans return to Africa, or were avid hunters of Native peoples. We have to learn to live with the past where necessary, at least for the time being.

3) My third recommendation is crucial to my prior two points: The Bancroft Library should emphatically lead the way in providing a permanent exhibit, as well as temporary exhibits, and a conference, as well as a series of on-going discussions regarding this controversy. So many important potential topics come to mind: who H.H. Bancroft was and his legacy, for good and for ill; white supremacy in historical perspective; what comes of confronting the contradictions of honored political and cultural leaders of the past; and how to best grapple with contemporary demands for social justice in light of historical forces in context. I don’t know that such a public and scholarly confrontation with the past has occurred on these building name changes and the concomitant call for justice, but here is where “the Bancroft” can lead into those contradictions with dignity and courage.

Do you have any additional feedback to share with the committee?
Peace be with us all.

"What does the name Bancroft mean to you?
Bancroft has always meant to me the premier repository for comprehensive collections of materials covering the history of California and the American West.

What does the name Hubert Howe Bancroft mean to you? How have Hubert Howe Bancroft's efforts enriched and/or harmed you or the communities you represent?
To tell you the truth, i never thought about Hurbert Howe Bancroft until I was invited to serve on the Friends of the Bancroft board. The materials accumulated by the collection baring his name were a primary research source for my masters thesis in English on Black Literature in the 18th Century.

What are some foreseeable opportunities and challenges with reckoning with Hubert Howe Bancroft's legacy?
The most valuable opportunity I can see to ""reckon with"" ( or even atone for) Bancroft's own writings is to continue to expand the diverse collection of California and Western materials reflecting the multi-cultural contributions made by writers, artists, historians and academics from all ethnic, professional and racial backgrounds. There will be challenges to the future of scholarship if the name Bancroft is erased and one of the University of California's most valuable sub-brands is buried and forgotten.

What recommendations do you have regarding outcomes and actions for this committee to consider?
I have recently been discussing this ""reckoning"" process with dedicated supporters of the Bancroft Library: former board members, Chairs, major donors and two former Directors of the Bancroft. We all have issues not only understanding the process that has led to the removal of names from six buildings on campus but how the lack of professional diversity of committee members can lead to a productive and positive outcome for the University of California.

Do you have any additional feedback to share with the committee?
My academic colleagues have brought up some very reasonable points of view as well as made some wise recommendations. I have been involved with the Bancroft in three different capacities: a research student in 1972/73, as a member of the Friends, and as former Chair of the Friends. I might also add that I was deeply involved with the name change at Berkeley Law where I was employed as the Assistant Dean for Development under Dear Chris Edley for seven years. In situations like name changes and donor restrictions, Dean Edely would often refer to the various committees around the University as ""Moscow Central"". We moved cautiously with the name change and came up with a solution where Berkeley Law would be the primary branding with a lockup that included ""Boalt Hall"" under the primary identification. It satisfied a wide range of the Law Schools largest donors who threatened to pull their support. We also looked at the cost for removing signage and the long term loss of income from donors who not only gave annually but had Berkeley Law (Boalt) in their estate planning.

I will also add that prior to evolving my professional career into development, I spent thirty three years in the advertising, branding and identity business. Building strong profitable and productive brands takes long periods of time and careful messaging. It also takes a boatload of money. I had no idea of HH Bancroft's abhorrent opinions about other races until this year. I only knew that the Bancroft collection and library was in my estimation one of the ""crown jewels"" that contributes to our reputation as the worlds greatest public university. And we must all recognize that the Bancroft is not only a brand associated with the University of California, it is an international research and scholarly resource/brand for the world. To call it some other name like the UC Berkeley Western Americana Collection will not carry the same prestige and impact that the name Bancroft currently holds.

While I served the Bancroft Friends, i came to know the curators and management who came from the complete gamut of experience, race, sexual orientation, gender, and knowledge. Teresa Salazars work alone with the Latino/Hispanic communities is just one example. The Bancrofts exhibitions on Western and California history are deeply respected by the communities they celebrate. The recent Japanese Interment exhibition is just one example'.

The final comment I'll make is that brands matter.The committee members may not understand this point but brands are incredible assets to companies, institutions, universities and nations. They bring communities together and they instill pride in people who are celebrated by the brands. It's a shame that HH Bancroft wrote as many volumes as he did filled with his shocking racist opinions, but he did give the University of California the gift of its seed collection. We can erase his words or claim it was due to the time in history when they were written. But his seed gift has never reflected his own prejudices or failings. In fact this seed collection has evolved to help all of the world to respect and understand better the geography diversity of the Western United States.

This could be a learning experience. The name could be taken off the building and a plague placed in the lobby explaining the pluses and minus of HH Bancroft,. My plea to the committee and to our Chancellor who has a strong knowledgeable background in business and in brands that we separate the person Hubert Howe Bancroft from the international scholarly institution that has become the Bancroft Collection of California and American Western history."

"There is no question that H. H. Bancroft wrote a number of things about groups of human beings that today are understood to be offensive, even deplorable. We owe it to all humans, but especially those who experience oppression and marginalization, that we acknowledge the pain that many experience upon seeing and hearing such words. And if we are making visible the name, and some positive acts of a person who also wrote vile things inconsistent with present-day values, we should confront the bad at least as much, if not more than the good.

But how to reconcile the past with the present is a very challenging question, and I think much more so in this instance than in some of the other cases campus has addressed in recent years.

It is recently popular to address hateful past behaviors or speech by removing honorary namings and other honorific recognitions (for example, public statues and paintings). In the present instance — a university library collection named for the person who created the collection — I think de-naming is a very poor response, with much better alternatives available to us.

I was aware of the issues and initiated consideration of them within the University Library during my last several years as the university librarian (the person who prepared the proposal alerted us to his research and aims well before the proposal was submitted). I have been involved in many thoughtful, reflective, and informed discussions with library leaders who are committed to increasing the diversity of our collections (a core principle the Bancroft Library has already been following for decades!), and to acknowledging and reconciling with all sorts of hateful past behavior and speech. (The Bancroft Library is widely regarded, for example, for its collections on and the resulting study of the treatment of Chinese immigrants, the history of the LGBTQ+ community, the history of right-wing extremists, etc., etc.) My remarks below are the result of my own extended consideration of this case (and because I am retired as of 1 July 2024, these are my personal remarks, not an official statement).

I think it is vital to start by considering institutional context and mission. UC Berkeley is a _university_. The Bancroft Library is a unit within the university with a mission to educate and facilitate the study of history so that we might learn from the past.

As a university, it is our primary mission to conduct research and teach. We conduct research to extend human knowledge and understanding: to know *more*, not less. There is a relevant cliché (and like most clichés, it is one because it conveys a point that has survived the test of time): we academics approach upsetting problems and human mistakes and malfeasances as *teachable moments*. The core strength of liberal education is to confront the ugly (or difficult), make sense of it, and learn from it so that we live better lives in the future. We *teach* the principles and strategies of critical thinking so that citizens might engage in socially constructive advancement throughout their lives. And we do this teaching with the use of concrete, specific examples.

We can advance this core mission best by openly acknowledging, exploring, and discussing the life, times, and published words of H. H. Bancroft. Eliminating his name from the library collection that he originally created effectively eliminates this opportunity: there would be no nexus or institutional mandate to confront and learn from his example. Instead, retaining his name on the library collection that he originally created, but committing to ongoing research and teaching concerning his life, time, and words, provides a learning opportunity — ongoing teachable moments. (I think it is clear that removing his name will rapidly end any inquiry into his life and words, and what we can learn from them. Does anyone believe that there is — or will be for decades to come — ongoing inquiry on this campus into the life, words, and actions of Barrows, or Le Conte? Do students today — much less a decade from now — even just a few years after the de-naming, know the name of Barrows or anything about his vile work in the Philippines?)

Many, many caucasian males held and publicly expressed vile views about oppressed and marginalized peoples during the 19th century. One might argue that we need not continue to make visible the name of one such example in order to study, discuss, and learn from the prevalence of these now-recognized-to-be vile views. But I believe this argument is not wrong-footed in this instance.

For one thing, the Bancroft Library is a near-perfect institutional setting for precisely the type of open, restorative inquiry, transparency, and ongoing reconciling dialogue that we should be embracing, not running away from. It is the campus's primary history library, with a specific mission to reveal the bad as well as the good in past human behavior, and to make the past accessible for critical examination. This is an ideal opportunity for Berkeley to set an example for higher education, as it so often does. By implementing a set of ongoing reconciliation and restoration inquiries at the Bancroft Library itself, we can demonstrate how to acknowledge, engage with, and beneficially learn from the past in an ongoing way. This would be so much more constructive and enduring than a one-and-done gesture (de-naming).

I know personally, from having that library's staff report up to me for the past nine years, that they are uniformly and deeply committed to doing so. They have already developed multiple ideas for constructive, educational activities that the library could commit to undertake, on an ongoing basis, to fulfill its mission to support and advance historical inquiry.

There are other specific and relevant issues, of which I'm sure the committee is aware. The original (and still remarkable and critical) collection was, indeed, ""Bancroft's library"" — creating it over decades was his most consequential life project. His name then came to the Berkeley campus not as an honorific, but as a factual description: Berkeley purchased Mr. Bancroft's library. That the collections would be named the Bancroft Library henceforth was, to my understanding, a term of the legal contract (bill of sale) between the university and Mr. Bancroft, and it was committed as a permanent name by resolution of the Regents. (Though perhaps a remote risk, it is my understanding from consultation with university lawyers that Mr. Bancroft's successors would have grounds to sue the university if we reneged on that agreement.)

Another salient fact is that successors of Mr. Bancroft, including notably his grandson and great-granddaughter, have been loyal and generous financial and volunteer service supporters of the Library (and in the case of the great-granddaughter, continue to be so today.) There has been nothing to suggest that these family successors have engaged in hateful racist acts or speech; indeed, the great-granddaughter, a published author, has been open in criticizing the views of H. H. Bancroft on these issues. To take the name off what is effectively the ""Bancroft _Family_ Library"" would be an insult to these generations of Bancrofts, who have generously enabled the collections to grow and become world-famous.

Though not as critical as issues of principle — which includes serving the university's mission to research, learn, and teach — I'm sure you have been informed about the enormous cost to the university of removing the name. As the former university librarian, I have first-hand knowledge of these costs, so I will mention them here. First, the library is a set of collections and an institution; it is not a building. ""De-naming"" would be a much longer and more costly activity than taking the name off a building and revising campus maps.* In particular, the name appears in millions of ongoing, in-use records: for example, every catalog entry for an item in the collections identifies them as items maintained by Bancroft Library. A staff analysis last spring of the cost of reworking all of the records — which are of many different types, stored in many different systems, both electronic and analog (paper) — estimated a cost of *several million dollars*, including many person-years of library staff effort which would then not be available for the constructive, mission-focused work that they were hired to do.

*[Note: As I expect you have been informed, there is confusion among some on this issue of whether the Bancroft Library is a building. It is not: it is housed in the building named Doe Annex, and it is not the only occupant of that building (for example, the University Library IT department is in Doe Annex, as is the University Librarian administrative suite). However, because the location of the collection is identified with a sign over the eastern door of Doe Annex, and because of misleading labeling on some campus maps, some incorrectly think the _building_ is named Bancroft Library. This can easily be corrected, and I believe should be: the sign over the east door should be removed, and campus maps should be revised.]

The other major cost would be a substantial reduction in philanthropic support. Some context: about 60% of the operating budget for Bancroft Library comes from philanthropy (endowment earnings and new cash gifts). Most of the additions to collections are acquired as philanthropic gifts. Many supporters would withhold gifts and re-direct them elsewhere (away from Berkeley) if the Bancroft Library were to be unnamed, causing irreparable harm to the university's mission. I say this speaking as the person with ultimate responsibility for all of the fundraising for the University Library over the past nine years (and, somewhat immodestly, I am a very experienced and successful fundraiser). Because of their passion for *history*, many of these donors have deep, personal feelings about attempts to ""whitewash"" or deny history. I know this because I engaged in several discussions with donors who did stop giving after *other* campus buildings were de-named. (I am not saying that Berkeley should not have de-named Boalt Hall, Kroeber Hall, etc.; I am just providing first-hand evidence that *donors with a particular passion for a history library* are unhappy about this practice, and that unhappiness will be magnified many times over if the history library itself is unnamed). I also know this because as soon as the proposal to de-name the Bancroft Library was made public, many donors began informing us that they would reduce or altogether stop their support if Berkeley did this.

Thus, between the high costs of undertaking a de-naming process, and the expected substantial decrease in philanthropic support, there are likely to be permanent reductions in Bancroft Library staffing, and substantial diversion of their efforts from their primary mission supporting research and teaching.

It is worth noting that the community of donors to Bancroft Library has a quite different profile than the rest of the campus donor community. Not only are they passionate about history — the study of the good, but also, and perhaps especially, the study of the bad and the ugly. (They are not donors because they want to honor H. H. Bancroft: they are donors because they want to support the collections and current services of this institution.) They are also to a much greater extent than other donors only connected to Berkeley because of this library: a high fraction of them are not alumni, and do not give to other units on campus. As campus fundraisers know, it is difficult to convince people who were not alumni to give generously to Berkeley: their departure would be a great (and enduring) loss. The donors' unusual composition also highlights an important fact: the Bancroft Library is internationally renowned, _separately_ from its association with Berkeley. It is one of the top special collections in the U.S. and the world and is widely regarded by academic and non-academic, professional and amateur, historians around the world. De-naming a history library would be a black mark on Berkeley in this international community; the path of constructive acknowledgment and restorative reconciliation would, in contrast, be seen widely as a positive demonstration of intellectual leadership.

To close, I will summarize: Committing to an ongoing program of acknowledgment, accounting, critical examination, and teaching, all focused on reconciliation and restorative justice, while retaining the historically accurate name on the collections (and respecting the legal commitment the university made to do so), is the approach most consonant with Berkeley's mission: to create teachable moments and to learn from the past."

What does the name Bancroft mean to you?
Elitist, white, colonial

What does the name Hubert Howe Bancroft mean to you? How have Hubert Howe Bancroft's efforts enriched and/or harmed you or the communities you represent?
From an Indigenous perspective, Bancroft represents both a repository of invaluable historical data and at the same time it is also a reflection of colonial narratives. His collections are a reflection of his racism and biases of the past that do not always align with Indigenous worldviews or historical experiences.

What are some foreseeable opportunities and challenges with reckoning with Hubert Howe Bancroft's legacy?
The Library has an opportunity to empower Indigenous scholars and community members by facilitating engagement with historical texts and their misrepresentations, elevating Indigenous voices in the process. This serves as a crucial reminder of the need to decolonize the archive and ensure that Indigenous communities maintain control over their own stories and narratives.

The Library can also take this opportunity to engage with Indigenous and other communities of color, asking, "How can we acknowledge the harm caused by H.H. Bancroft’s work, and what steps can we take to reconcile that damage?"
Given the extensive Indigenous collections housed at the Bancroft, it is deeply concerning that there has been minimal outreach to the very communities most affected by Bancroft's racist legacy.

What recommendations do you have regarding outcomes and actions for this committee to consider?
Recognize Indigenous digital and data sovereignty
Engage the University Tribal Liaison
Rename of Bancroft

Do you have any additional feedback to share with the committee?
This is about moving beyond simply renaming a library and collecting Indigenous materials and documents, it's about shifting power and control back to the communities whose histories are housed in these collections. True collaboration, respect for Indigenous knowledge systems, trauma informed care, and decolonizing frameworks are at the heart of making a library like the Bancroft more reflective of Indigenous experience and agency.

What does the name Bancroft mean to you?
The street (apparently named for someone else) and the library, otherwise I knew nothing of who he was. I doubt many people know who he was.

Do you have any additional feedback to share with the committee?
It sounds like you're mainly worried about losing money by changing the name. If I were donating to a library, I'd rather donate to some place that doesn't honor racism. And I think that if the reasons for the name change were publicized, most people who are considering donating would feel the same.

Many thanks-It would be inconceivable that it can remain with that name-one just has to read his works:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1bVqg9UmlNdzOmnz9lqYzioGRBWITzXNL/view

There is a wickedness there that requires an exorcism.

There are people worried about reputation and donations if a name is changed. Though those are real concerns, future generations could easily feel LESS RESPECT and want to give nothing to an institution that is faced with this decision and chooses to lift up white supremacy. There is little dignity attached to a name we're all ashamed of.

"What does the name Bancroft mean to you?
Refers to both a great special collections library and to a 19th century racist

What does the name Hubert Howe Bancroft mean to you? How have Hubert Howe Bancroft's efforts enriched and/or harmed you or the communities you represent?
He enriched scholarship by collecting (or making it possible to collect) materials about the West, including materials about the Chinese, the Californios, indigenous Californians et al. that we might not otherwise have; but he also made public his virulently racist opinions about Californians of color. (also passed off the work of others as his own)

What recommendations do you have regarding outcomes and actions for this committee to consider?
I would support the unnaming of the Bancroft Library if it is possible. If that is not possible for legal reasons, it may be possible to depreciate the use of the name; no one refers to the Main Stacks as the Gardner Stacks (except when necessary) and the Jean Hargrove Music Library is listed on the maps under M for Music... can we refer to the library without the use of the name Bancroft except when absolutely necessary? List it as The Rare Books and Special Collections library (Bancroft)? one problem is what alternative terms to use; it's not the only special collections library on campus, unlike, say, the Law Library. I would envision a prominently placed statement explaining the depreciation or the asterisk that we have to add to the name. Obviously many people have the ingrained habit of referring to the Bancroft (unlike the name Gardner, which was a later addition and never took off) but if we can train ourselves to do it and refer to it that way on documentation, websites etc. we can at least make it clear that the Library and the campus are acknowledging HHB's complex legacy as a great collector but an unrepentant racist, and perhaps some day the name will be much less prominent.

What does the name Bancroft mean to you?
It means the name of our main Library which I have appreciated as an undergrad and have supported fully.

What does the name Hubert Howe Bancroft mean to you? How have Hubert Howe Bancroft's efforts enriched and/or harmed you or the communities you represent?
It meant nothing to me until I read some background explaining the possibility of removing his name. The contents of his library have enriched my education, There has been no harm done.

What are some foreseeable opportunities and challenges with reckoning with Hubert Howe Bancroft's legacy?
The challenges are his background and the opportunity is to deal with his background in the best way possible. His family was a safe house for the Underground Railroad. (that may seem inappropriate to some but in retrospect, is offering freedom to slaves a bad thing?) Yes, he gave opinions that were not appreciated and were seen as unacceptable,. Interesting, with his early family background, he became a racist in later years. But whitewashing America (removal of statues, etc.) is not in our best interest. We are part of history whether or not we like what that history is. We can't deny the fact that things happened but perhaps maintaining that history can prove as a reminder of what we might not wish to repeat.

What recommendations do you have regarding outcomes and actions for this committee to consider?
I recommend that we acknowledge H. H. Bancroft's background in a visible way. Perhaps we build an exhibition. We can have signage that acknowledges his past. I do NOT support removing his name from the library.

Do you have any additional feedback to share with the committee?
Huburt Howe Bancoft did many good things, bringing knowledge of the West and making it available for all to read. Our collections on the US West are the best in the country. They are free and available to all. Keeping his name is appropriate for his literary contribution.

I make a distinction between Hubert Howe Bancroft, a bitter, angry racist who was also an exceptionally important collector of books and historic materials, on the one hand, and the Bancroft Library, on the other.

I teach history at UC Berkeley. My research and teaching focuses on the North American West, the U.S.-Mexican borderlands, U.S.-Latin American relations, and Indigenous history. So the Bancroft Library is absolutely indispensable for me and my students.

I knew something about H.H. Bancroft's racism, but was still appalled and dismayed by the examples of his ignorant, racist, hateful views that Sean Peterson and his colleagues highlighted in their thoughtful report. And I realize that those examples were only a sampling; undoubtedly there is far more that could be discovered in his huge corpus of writings. As a member of the university committed to the modern ideals articulated in the un-naming proposal, I find Bancroft’s views utterly nauseating. And as a relatively privileged white man on this campus, I can’t pretend to know how these vile writings affect people of color in our community. I entirely agree with the proposal’s observation that “H.H. Bancroft was a white supremacist who would have loathed the campus’s embrace of diversity and inclusion.”

That said, I respectfully disagree with the conclusion that to use the Bancroft Library is to affirm “the hateful views of its namesake.” I know hundreds of people who have worked in the Bancroft Library – historians, anthropologists, literary scholars; undergrads and grad students; local community members and academics from all over the world; and, of course, the devoted and talented archivists who are the heart of the library. Many of these hundreds are themselves people of color. Most have done research in the library that excavates and honors the diversity of our national and global history; research that has helped transform our understanding of the past. I obviously can’t speak for any of these people, but I strongly suspect few would agree with the proposition that the work they did in the Bancroft Library affirmed H.H. Bancroft’s hateful views.

The reason why, I think, is that the Bancroft Library has become an institution that utterly eclipses its racist namesake. In my corner of the academic world, the term “Bancroft Library” doesn’t evoke an image of institutional respect for racist ignorance and cruelty. “Bancroft Library” evokes a treasure-house of irreplaceable, unique material for reckoning with the past. It evokes an institution that has become totally indispensable to writing about the history of Indigenous people of the Americas generally and the North American West in particular; to writing about Latin America and about Spanish-speaking people in what would become the United States; to recovering the history of Asian-America; and to understanding African American history in the West. Again, this is just my corner of teaching and research interest – the Bancroft Library is obviously much more even than this.

In comparison to its precious global institutional reputation, H.H. Bancroft is a small, forgettable figure, known by relatively few. Even U.S. historians know little about the man. Twice in the past few months I’ve had conversations with distinguished colleagues who thought that the library had been named after the much more prominent 19th century historian, George Bancroft. I myself had never even heard of H.H. Bancroft's book Retrospection: Political and Personal, where he aired so many of his confused and disgusting views. That’s because almost no one today thinks of H.H. Bancroft as an important intellectual or a thinker that needs to be grappled with. Those who do know anything about him know H.H. Bancroft not for his hateful writings, or for his body of writing generally, but rather for the incredibly important work he and his colleagues did as collectors of books and historical material.

This is why, from my perspective, the Bancroft Library is not a building honoring a 19th century racist. It is an institution that has done and will continue to do absolutely vital work recovering our shared past. In that sense it seems to me that the situation that your committee is grappling with isn’t really analogous to the re-namings of buildings on campus. It’s more analogous to the question of renaming Berkeley – the campus or the city named after Bishop George Berkeley, the slaveholding philosopher. As the university spokesperson recently put it, “We acknowledge that the university’s founders chose to name their new town and campus after an individual whose views warrant no honor or commemoration. At the same time, we are cognizant of the fact that over the course of the ensuing 155 years since the university’s founding, ‘Berkeley’ has come to embody and represent very different values and perspectives.”

The same holds true for the Bancroft Library. H.H. Bancroft gave a very important collection to the University. But he didn't make the "Bancroft Library." Generations of scholars, students, directors, donors, and archivists made the Bancroft Library. Tens of thousands of people have collectively established a precious global reputation – a reputation distinct from and in opposition to the views of its namesake.

I hope your committee will find a way to surface and acknowledge H.H. Bancroft’s reprehensible views while defending that invaluable work. Doing that would also be defending our own agency. H.H. Bancroft doesn’t get to decide whether working in the library that bears his name affirms his hateful views. We do.

What does the name Bancroft mean to you?
It refers to a library on the UC Berkeley campus.

What does the name Hubert Howe Bancroft mean to you? How have Hubert Howe Bancroft's efforts enriched and/or harmed you or the communities you represent?
It means nothing to me.

What are some foreseeable opportunities and challenges with reckoning with Hubert Howe Bancroft's legacy?
I have little interest in exploring opportunities and challenges with respect to Mr Bancroft.

What recommendations do you have regarding outcomes and actions for this committee to consider?The committee should do nothing.

What does the name Bancroft mean to you?
I have often access the collection and appreciate that it exists.

What does the name Hubert Howe Bancroft mean to you? How have Hubert Howe Bancroft's efforts enriched and/or harmed you or the communities you represent?
The Name enhances an already famed collection.

What are some foreseeable opportunities and challenges with reckoning with Hubert Howe Bancroft's legacy?
A diminishment of the brand for scholars and for the University.

What recommendations do you have regarding outcomes and actions for this committee to consider?
I address the library committee that is calling for the “Bancroft Library Reckoning” by asserting that, in my opinion, this committee has no moral or legal standing to pass judgment on H. H. Bancroft’s nineteenth century Civil War era views on race, however repugnant they are to twenty-first century Americans. It is my view that the focus most appropriate is on Bancroft’s contribution to the University Library system and students and scholars who access the Bancroft collection, not his idiosyncratic views.

While we will all rise to repudiate his views on race, we ought not repudiate the totality of the man and his significance to our library and public education.

What does the name Bancroft mean to you?
I am struck by and grateful for the Library Guide, "Bancroft Library Reckoning Committee: Resources on H.H. Bancroft and The Bancroft Library," compiled for the committee. Histiographical and critical scholarship of Hubert Howe Bancroft spans over three decades, with a consistent portrayal that Bancroft's misrepresentation of communities of color has influenced intellectual and global histories and understandings of the Americas for over a century. Selections from the Library Guide should accompany any public acknowledgement or engagement: the public will stand to benefit for how Bancroft's racist scholarship (as curated in the proposal) has affected a variety of academic fields and scholars, particularly at UC Berkeley. Library Guide: https://guides.lib.berkeley.edu/bancroft_reckoning_readings

What are some foreseeable opportunities and challenges with reckoning with Hubert Howe Bancroft's legacy?
The opportunity before the Bancroft Library Reckoning Committee and UC Berkeley leadership is to demonstrate how scholarship is not an Ivory Tower enterprise: Bancroft's racist scholarship has affected how other scholars and readers interpret (and make policy decisions about) communities of color across the Americas. I recommend public acknowledgement and/or engagement that centers on Bancroft and his interlocutors: how a search into other racist scholarship that cites Bancroft draws direct lines to Bancroft's writings. Mapping the network of Bancroft's social, intellectual, and political legacy -- his adherents and his critics -- allows the public to view Bancroft from multiple perspectives, as a person of/outside his era and as a ghost into other eras (including our current times).

What recommendations do you have regarding outcomes and actions for this committee to consider?
The Bancroft Library Reckoning Committee is charged to recommend public engagement, and I recommend both permanent (signage and physical exhibits) and episodic (events/ conferences) projects to offer platforms to recontextualize and grapple with Bancroft. From my past work on the Building Name Review Committee, I suggest creating an online museum exhibit on the unnaming process. Berkeley Law School's digital exhibit may be instructive: https://www.law.berkeley.edu/atimeforchange/ I also encourage members of the Bancroft Library Reckoning Committee and the public to physically visit the "A Time for Change" exhibit in the main hall of Berkeley Law School. It remains the only public acknowledgement of the unnaming process of any campus building. The exhibit is a monument: prominently featured at Berkeley Law School to invite all members of the law school community and the public to learn about Boalt, the Chinese Exclusion Act, and Berkeley Law's AAPI community.

Do you have any additional feedback to share with the committee?
For background, I have co-authored all recommendations for the university to advance public acknowledgment and recontextualization projects on Boalt Hall, Barrows Hall, LeConte Hall, Kroeber Hall, and Moses Hall (all campus buildings ever unnamed until 2024 though the Building Name Review Committee). These recommendations have included public exhibits and events. Although main building signage has been removed following decisions to unname buildings, aside from Berkeley Law School, no other recommendation to initiate public acknowledgement has been started. Indeed, over the past six years, journalists have reported how monument signage throughout campus still bears the namesakes of figures whose buildings were unnamed, even after the main building signage was removed. See, for example: https://www.dailycal.org/news/race-and-diversity/members-of-berkeley-com... I suggest that should Bancroft Library Reckoning Committee decide to unname Bancroft Library, it recommends a concrete project with a concrete timeline for public acknowledgement. Furthermore, the Bancroft Library Reckoning Committee should advocate that the Building Name Review Committee's recommendations for public acknowledgement projects be realized for Barrows, Moses, Kroeber, and LeConte, perhaps by adding an addendum in their proposal to university leadership and in public statements to the media.

-I am a graduate of UC Berkeley, class of “72.

-I was assistant travel director at the Alumni Association/Cal Discoveries, 2006-2009.

-I have just completed 4 terms/12 years on the board of the Friends of the Bancroft Library.

-The Bancroft Library is in our will and at this moment, stock market allowing, my donation would be well into 6 digits.

I am writing concerning the issue with HH Bancroft and his continued association with our world-renowned library.

I think we all agree that HH Bancroft had some disgusting beliefs. They were vile and in no way should he be honored for them. But can we also agree that he donated, in part, the beginnings of one of the world’s most exceptional research libraries? That the Bancroft Library is now mentioned in the same sentence as the Library of Congress and Oxford University? That the NAME Bancroft is recognized in scholarly circles, globally? That the Bancroft is a jewel in the crown of the UC System, which is the Jewel in the Crown of the State of California.

Shall we tear down the Washington Monument? The Jefferson Memorial? These men were slave owners and their beliefs about mankind are completely unacceptable to 21st century Americans. But, without those two men, and other slaveowners of the era, we would not be sitting in our university ivory towers, passing judgment on them. North America would be a land mass of English, French, Spanish, Dutch and Russian provinces at the very least. The concept of a “United States” would be an historical footnote in a “foreign” textbook. We must applaud, honor and yes, even respect, not erase, all these men did to not only create our country but for providing the long-range wisdom that has provided us our form of government (flawed as it may be at times). You know, the country that people escape TO, not FROM. And, yes, of course, we must acknowledge, understand and learn from their disastrous and disparaging treatment of other human beings. But it is perilous to erase history. If we erase history, how can we ever learn from it?

My point is….

The individuals who are demanding the changes to the name Bancroft have probably not investigated their own ancestry. How many of us DON’T have a slaveowner, Indian fighter, murderer, thief, Civil War rebel etc., in our past? We all have ancestors we are not proud of, that we disagree with, that we would rather not be related to! But we ARE related and for better or worse, this is the fabric of our lives, of our being. Of our history, of our nation.

When will universities cease being so obsequious to the fringes? History IS Tragedy. To try and delete it is imprisoning and hypocritical and, in my opinion, very dangerous. Don’t dishonor UC Berkeley and bend to a few radicals…AGAIN. Let’s learn from the past, study the past, and adhere to the words of Colonial Williamsburg’s byline: “That the Future May Learn from the Past”.

Financially, to change the name of the Bancroft would cost hundreds of thousands of dollars in rebranding and creating a new identity. Massive Public Relations campaigns would be necessary, a vast waste time and resources and, most of all this step could shatter our national and international influence. It will take decades to recover our status as a major player on the international academic stage. With all the budget cuts and financial woes we are suffering nowadays, why open yet another financial pit? Or, to put it bluntly, We Can’t Afford It!

Oh, and you may well lose some very major donors to the library and the University who feel the same way I do. Take the name off the building if you must, but I implore this committee to not yield, as CAL does so often, to the small minority of fringe folk wanting this change. Do NOT drop the Title of the Bancroft for the university’s sake, its heritage, its importance on the global stage.

Thank you for your consideration.