(This article was written largely in response to inquiries (to WIEP) about Thanksgiving history, myths, etc. Sources are included in the notes. Resource pages, including recommended lesson plans, are in the works... Thank you for your patience -Jessica)
|
The “First Thanksgiving”
Understanding the Semi-Accurate History of a Half-Truth Holiday
Jessica Diemer-Eaton
Nov. 25, 2022
|
“Why do you learn history?”
I’m sorry to say I don’t remember her name, or if I was 14 or 15 when I took her history class. But I guess those details are not important. It was her words I remember vividly. She wasn’t like the full-time teachers on staff. She came to my high school to teach two, maybe three classes a day, otherwise she was teaching her classes at the local community college. The lady was passionate about history, and didn’t seem to mind teaching a bunch a teenagers either.
-------------
One time I was kept after class (not the first), probably because I was struggling with the material (as usual), when she dragged me into a larger discussion on history and why I should care to know it. We both slowly walked toward the door leading to the hallway when she asked me “Jess, why do you learn history? Why do I teach you history?”
I knew the answer to that.
Everybody knows the answer to that...
“So we don’t repeat it.”
With her hand on my shoulder she jerked me back from the doorway, turning me towards her, sticking her face in mine she said (quite enthusiastically) “BULLSHIT!"
I was stunned at her enthusiastic (somewhat inappropriate) response...
"How many times have you reviewed the Holocaust? Probably every other year, right?”
Silently I nodded my head in agreement...
(It seemed like we touched on the Holocaust multiple times).
“Have ever heard of the Trail of Tears?”
I was confused by the question... I answered “no.”
She continued: Of course you haven’t!… That’s because we teach you history to make you a model citizen, "to make you a good little patriot.”
She went on, explaining to me that while it would be good to not repeat the errors of our past, we can’t do that if we don’t actually learn of those errors. And the curriculum she had to follow didn’t make it necessary, or possible, to address the Trail of Tears and other historical atrocities committed by the United States. She made it clear I was being taught a history that almost always casted America (and Americans) in a favorable light.
--------------
------------------
So what does this have to do with the “First Thanksgiving?”
Everything. This popular “First Thanksgiving” narrative was largely developed and pushed in schools during the first half of the 20th century, consequently following a shift away from the traditional focus of history towards teaching patriotism and good citizenship. Around the same time elementary schools started delivering history in “a smattering of disconnected images in the form of “holiday history” blips” (1), including the very entertaining, partly fictional, mostly favorable “First Thanksgiving” narrative.
----------
Teaching patriotism in a history class forum has traditionally meant presenting a history that has hid details (or full events) unflattering of early Protestant English-speaking settlers (“Our Founders”) and the Anglo-Americans that followed. Our retelling of the “First Thanksgiving” favors the Pilgrims by excluding their culpability and including the Wampanoag only in a Pilgrim-approving role...
------------
For example, we leave out a place the Pilgrims' named The First Encounter, where the Pilgrims were attacked by Wampanoag warriors, resulting in the English firing back. Indeed this was the Pilgrims' first contact, first exchange with the Wampanoags... Not exactly a peaceful welcoming for saintly Pilgrims, both groups using violence against each other to defend themselves (the attack likely fueled by the Pilgrims earlier actions - what the Wampanoag saw as invaders raiding their homes, stealing their vital food stores, desecrating their relatives' graves, and worse, stalking vulnerable tribesmen with unknown intentions). Many times the English attempted to make first (peaceful) contact to which the Wampanoag declined by running away or hiding, which makes it obvious the Pilgrims were not as welcomed as we were taught in school. The Wampanoags' welcome (and friendship) was largely driven by the English’s refusal to leave Wampanoag land (2). Knowing this is integral to understanding the 1621 harvest celebration in context, but we generally don’t teach it.
----------
The reality is that many teachers are aware that the “First Thanksgiving” narrative they teach may be half true, or not truthfully represented. So why don’t we just correct this, drop the mythology in favor of presenting what’s known and teaching historical inquiry? Well, teachers may find that a hard order to fulfill for many reasons:
-------------
Maybe their textbooks/workbooks (even revised editions) contain outdated content. And it takes extra time to create or gather outside information and resources to replace their book’s easy, prepackaged lesson plans... extra time teachers generally don’t have.
---------------
…Or teachers may be pressured (or feel they are going to be pressured) from other teachers, principles, or parents to comply with the ol’ “Thanksgiving” narrative (3).
------------
…Or because the ol’ “First Thanksgiving” narrative is a beloved school play tradition that’s hard to break.
----------------
…Or maybe whenever teachers attempt to research the history of Thanksgiving they are overwhelmed with all these myth-busting online articles contradicting each other, causing more confusion than easing the mind of educators in search of answers (4). (And so in writing this article, I too have become part of the problem.)
-----------
…And many may believe that presenting a confident, partly true story (heritage narrative) is better than presenting a half-mystery history (requiring students to use historical inquiry), admitting to young students that even the most revered of historical American events may be full of unknowns.
------------------
Plus the “First Thanksgiving” narrative’s staying power is as good as a greasy gravy stain - almost impossible to get rid of. After all, it’s part of our Nation’s “origin story” (5). It’s endearing, nostalgic, and makes us (non-natives) feel good… good about our history, and good as settler-Americans.
----------------
-----------------
But there was a “First Thanksgiving,” right?
Yes, in fact you could say there were several European first thanksgivings in the New World (6). Historians have identified a few early thanksgivings in colonial New England that some believe could compete for the title. Among them are:
----------
-The 1621 Pilgrim harvest celebration in which 90 Wampanoag men were present (the one we have effectively designed our modern holiday to commemorate).
---------
-The 1623 Pilgrim Thanksgiving, declared a day of thanksgiving which was observed with fasting and prayer.
-----------
- A 1637 Thanksgiving day declared to celebrate the safe return of soldiers after subduing the Pequot Nation.
----------------
This 1637 Thanksgiving is particularly problematic because unlike the 1621 harvest celebration in which Pilgrims and Wampanoags peacefully feasted together, this official day of Thanksgiving marked the safe return of colonial soldiers after they (and allied Native warriors) attacked Mistick Fort, a village of Pequots, massacring 400+ Native men, women, and children. A few captured Pequots, if not killed, were sold into slavery. The remaining free Pequots were “officially dissolved” by forced treaty and colonial language (outlawing their tribal name) - many regarding this as genocide through violence, and language (7). Despite all this, the Pequot People did continue (and it’s important that children/students who do learn their history also recognize their continued presence) (8).
-------------------
Does this mean the “First Thanksgiving” celebrated the deaths of Native Americans?
No... however it does mean that English settlers had celebrated the destruction of a Native Nation with a Thanksgiving observance.
-
But isn’t the 1637 celebration the first official Thanksgiving celebrated by New England settlers?
No. The Pilgrim Thanksgiving in 1623 is the first officially declared Thanksgiving observance in Southern New England.
------------------
But it’s the 1621 harvest celebration Americans commemorate as our “First Thanksgiving,” at least since the late 1800’s (9). Yes, the “Pilgrim-Indian unity” theme wasn’t always part of our Thanksgiving rituals (proving that letting go of children parading around in construction paper “Indian” costumes will not ruin the holiday). Since the early 1900’s, that infamous harvest celebration has been taught, nay, preached to young, impressionable students. One would only expect the written record of this momentous occasion to be clear, extensive, impressive. Well, about that…
|
Don’t blink… or you might miss “Thanksgiving”
So far we know only one written account about a harvest celebration with Wampanoag guests in the Fall of 1621. On December 11th of that same year, Edward Winslow wrote in a letter:
----------------
“Our corn [wheat] did prove well, and God be praised, we had a good increase of Indian corn [maize], and our barley indifferent good, but our peas not worth the gathering, for we feared they were too late sown, they came up very well, and blossomed, but the sun parched them in the blossom; our harvest being gotten in, our governor sent four men on fowling, that so we might after a more special manner rejoice together, after we had gathered the fruit of our labors; they four in one day killed as much fowl, as with a little help beside, served the company almost a week, at which time amongst other recreations, we exercised our arms, many of the Indians coming amongst us, and among the rest their greatest King Massasoit, with some ninety men, whom for three days we entertained and feasted, and they went out and killed five deer, which they brought to the plantation and bestowed on our governor, and upon the captain, and others. And although it be not always so plentiful, as it was at this time with us, yet by the goodness of God, we are so far from want, that we often wish you partakers of our plenty.” (10)
-------------------
…Yeah, that’s it. Yet it seems like we are taught a larger, as a-matter-of-factly “First Thanksgiving” narrative… with many details authoritatively presented despite no mention of them in this short account.
|
Those common details not actually detailed
Sure there are a lot of myths surrounding the 1621 “First Thanksgiving,” most notably the material culture involved - pumpkin pies, headdresses, tipis, totem poles, and an unhealthy obsession for belt buckles and vegan leather (paper bag) vests. Most of these have been addressed by easy to access online lesson plans offered by reputable museums and cultural organizations. However our knowledge concerning the social details of the this event may be, well, less than proven. Authors and editors of children’s textbooks (and many accompanying lessons) may avoid the “uncertainty or controversy” of major historical events (like the 1621 harvest celebration) despite the fact that even historians cannot be sure of those specific details. (11). Here are a few of those specific details…
------------------
Back when you were growing up you may have acted out a “First-Thanksgiving” play where “the English and native men, women, and children ate together (12).” In reality we have no indication that Native women or children were present at the English’s 1621 Thanksgiving. Winslow specifically mentioned Massasoit (Ousamequin - the paramount Wampanoag leader) “with some 90 men” showing up at the Pilgrims’ festivities. Some have pointed out that just because the English didn’t write it (specifically) doesn’t mean it didn’t happen, particularly when it came to recording the presence of Native women. As someone who routinely scrutinizes European/Anglo-American accounts that appear to ignore Indigenous women, I can say this is a fair statement. Still this explanation is speculative, as there could certainly be reasons why only Wampanoag men were in attendance (13). What we know for sure is men were the only specific guest demographics given.
--------------------
You may have also been taught that the English “invited” (in advance) their Native American neighbors to dine with them in a friendly, unofficial capacity, which takes us to the next assumption: “As an expression of gratitude, the Pilgrims invited Squanto and around 90 Wampanoag to join them in a celebration of their first successful harvest…(14)” The assumption here is that the Wampanoag were invited (plausible) as an expression of gratitude (far more speculative).
------------------
First, we have no written account of the English extending any invitation in advance to their Wampanoag neighbors, asking them to join their harvest celebration. Still Darius Coombs, a Mashpee-Wampanoag Cultural & Outreach Coordinator, felt the Wampanoag party was invited based on how fast the 90 men organized and assuming Ousamequin came straight from his village located at a distance away (not coming from a closer Wampanoag village). And according to Jeremy Bangs (a former chief curator at Plimoth Plantation), inviting the Wampanoag would have been including the “stranger” in a harvest celebration the Pilgrims would have patterned after a feast of biblical origin (15). These observations prove a level of plausibility that the Wampanoags were invited (in advance) to attend the Pilgrims’s celebration. Still as Winslow relates it, the Wampanoag’s presence comes about as-a-matter-of-factly, after the gunfire… One would think if the Pilgrims extended an invitation to their Indigenous guests, who would fulfill such a symbolic role, more would have been said about it… though in fairness we would expect more to have been said about the 1621 harvest celebration if it was, in fact, the big deal we make it out to be.
----------------
Second, we can only assume Tisquantum was present at the gathering since he wasn’t mentioned in the account. And he may not have been “invited” with the other Wampanoags given he may had already been staying with the Pilgrims at this time. Tisquantum was a favored person to the English… He was a teacher, translator, and mediator who was written of often, though he wasn’t mentioned in Winslow’s letter detailing the harvest celebration. His absence from the account is noticeable, but then again so are the very few sentences devoted to the celebration. We have to keep in mind this letter was written with motive, and apparently unless you were were an “Indian king,” then your name didn’t make the credits.
-------------------
It is likely Tisquantum was present, though not a guest-of-honor. If Tisquantum had been invited “in gratitude” for sharing his farming knowledge, it wasn’t mentioned. Winslow failed to credit the teacher-translator, or any other Wampanoag, who directly (or indirectly) taught the English how to successfully grow their corn, instead praising God for their “good increase in Indian corn” in the letter. But such could be the thinking of Puritan settlers who assumed Native acts of “kindness and civility reflected God’s mercy” rather than the mannerisms or intelligence informed by Indigenous culture itself (16). If goodness came through Native persons, though not attributed to Native persons (considered uncivilized “without any knowledge of God”), maybe the Pilgrims’ gratitude too couldn’t be truly directed to Indigenous persons.
-------------
Were the English grateful? Absolutely. Were they grateful for the guidance and help the Wampanoag extended them? Surely they were. Were the Pilgrims grateful to the Wampanoag? The Pilgrims were grateful to God for sure… Whether they could be genuinely grateful to a group of non-Christians they viewed as less than themselves is debatable. William Bradford (Governor of Plymouth Colony) said it so plainly when he wrote Tisquantum was “a special instrument sent of God for [the Pilgrims’] good (17).”
|
When the history we teach reflects more about us…
And that’s the real myth - the spirit the holiday commemorates… the spirit of genuine gratitude and no-strings-attached friendship we inject into the “First Thanksgiving.” We say, with no written account and little evidence to speculate on, that the Pilgrims invited the Wampanoags as an expression of gratitude (gratitude toward the Native People is the context we teach). Moreover, we omit how shaky their alliance was, what drove the Wampanoag to align themselves with the Pilgrims, and what became of the English’s “friendship” and why… continuing to teach a “feel good history” that particularly suppresses Anglo culpability. But hopefully as we learn more historical context, we’ll want to teach a more honest history.
------------------------
Those infamous three days…
Can we visualize the 1621 harvest celebration more realistically? Of course. Based on what we do know about Wampanoag society, what we do know about Pilgrim culture, and how they likely meshed together based on their other meetings more documented, we can gain a possibly more accurate, definitely more conservative understanding of what the “First Thanksgiving” may have looked like…
-----------------
We don’t know why Massasoit (Ousamequin) and 90 of his fellow tribesmen went to Plymouth that day. Maybe they were invited, maybe they were party crashers. Regardless of why the Wampanoag men came to the colony, their appearance would have prompted the governor to welcome their Native neighbors, inviting them to stay, eat, and celebrate with the English. It’s likely that hosting the Wampanoag leader and his statesmen/warriors would have inherently turned the Pilgrim’s harvest celebration into a little more of a diplomatic affair. As the festivities progressed, the Pilgrims probably felt both merry and a bit uncomfortable as they navigated three days of poor communication between English and Wampanoag speakers (even if two translators were present). It’s likely most the Wampanoag men and most English persons gathered in separate groups while not actively engaging each other, like when feasting, though the heads-of-state may have sat together in a show of unity and respect for each other’s high office. They had “recreations” which may have included games like target practice, foot races, “stool-ball,” or “pitching the bar” (18). The Wampanoag men could have engaged in some traditional song and dance, the same they may have done during their own harvest ceremonies/celebrations. And overtures were made between leaders, such as when the Wampanoag bestowed newly-hunted deer to the English leadership.
-----------------------
What’s in a steak?
The party of Wampanoag men who came to the Pilgrims’ harvest celebrations very much outnumbered their English hosts. The Wampanoag men made the overage to hunt and present the English with deer after arriving to the celebration. Could this be interpreted as a noticeable strain on the English to furnish foods to feed all the “party-goers” once their numbers had tripled with the Wampanoag presence? Probably not. It’s likely Wampanoag hunters would have still sent for deer regardless of what the “smorgasbord” looked like. They presented deer to English leadership as a customary action, adding formality to their relationship even during a social gathering. It’s important to note, however, that the Wampanoag men apparently didn’t arrive with with the deer in hand (Could this be evidence the Wampanoag weren’t invited in advance?)
|
So why did they come?… And why did they stay?
If not an invitation, why did the Wampanoag men go to the colony? We can only speculate any number of reasons, including hearing a bustling about the colony and wanting to check it out… It’s almost certain the Wampanoag kept tabs on the Pilgrims comings and goings (19). The way Ousamequin and his followers understood their alliance or “formal friendship,” no invitation was needed for Wampanoags to come by the English town living in their own country. Possibly an unrelated matter of security or ceremony called upon Wampanoag men to gather, which may have been the reason they were so well organized. According to a Wampanoag explanation, the noise of the English firing their arms alerted them to check up on their foreign neighbors (20). It makes sense that unprovoked blasts could have aroused the suspicions of the Wampanoag enough to send a party of warriors and statesmen to the colony. After all, Ousamequin and his supporters were bound in an alliance to their English tenants… If the Pilgrims were in distress, it would be their duty to investigate and possibly help defend the fledgling colony.
---------------------
The Wampanoag had come to the English celebration, already in motion, and no doubt the English invited the Wampanoag to stay, at least once they were there. This we can be more sure of than an advanced invitation.
-----------------
A last minute “invite” should be understood in context… English leaders were wise enough to know that in local Native culture, informal visits were usually entertained and not turned away. To do so in this context would be more than just rude… it might cast a shadow over the legitimacy of their alliance to the Wampanoag. That is to say it would be a blunder not just in manners but in diplomacy, despite the fact that the English may had wanted to keep the Wampanoag at arm’s distance… “Whereas the Wampanoags thought of the treaty as part of a more general friendship between entire peoples that entitled both parties to hospitality at the other’s settlements, the English considered it an agreement between leaders restricted to the official terms (21).” The English sought to restrict friendly, unannounced visits from general Wampanoag populations… Not exactly the cozy, friendly spirit we conjure up when we think of the popular Pilgrim-Indian Thanksgiving narrative. In reality being close to Native Peoples presented challenges to the Separatists’ colony experiment. As Kathleen Brown points out:
|
“…The entire package of Indian manners, material culture, diet, clothing and physical appearance troubled many Pilgrims and Puritans who had left England to escape the evils that Indians seemed to embody. Indian customs of visiting, hospitality, and gift exchange promoted informal social contact, thereby eroding the boundaries between savage and saint and threatening the vision of an exclusive, godly, community. Friendly Indians presented an especially awkward dilemma because they didn’t stand at arm’s length but wanted to visit and be visited by their English neighbors (22).”
|
Any “gratitude” was short lived…
“One reason Ousamequin’s alliance with Plymouth gets such outsized attention in patriotic treatments of American history is that, on the surface, it was the peaceful exception to the violent rule of Indian-colonial relations (23).” Yes, the Wampanoag extended an umbrella of friendship, agreeing to mutual assistance in a way that made the English fellow countrymen. But this wasn’t permission for colonization of the Wampanoag. In Wampanoag reality, Ousamequin brought the English into the folds of his confederacy,… even early fair land sales (usage) were likely seen as contribution in support of Ousamequin’s sachemship. This was the only way the English could survive on land not theirs, land not familiar to themselves. (24). But any gratitude for the Wampanoag’s protection, support, and cooperation was short-lived. In one generation’s time, the Wampanoag and English fought each other in King Philip’s War - a series of conflicts spurred on mainly by the Pilgrims’ persistent taking of Wampanoag lands through constant pressure, shady dealings, and unfair court penalties payable only by land.
-------------------
Does it matter?
Yes. A history that assumes the best intentions and actions of Anglo players, is just propaganda. Teaching a “Pilgrim-Indian First Thanksgiving” history that is half-true and missing context adds to American’s deeper “historical denial.” These popular history narratives often present Pilgrims as righteous, peaceful, even saintly, when in fact Pilgrims were prepared to invade and settle on Indian Land with violence. Make no mistake, the Pilgrims were settlers, and the land was not unsettled. “Europeans had neither the skill nor the desire to “go boldly where none had dared go before.” They went to the Indians.” (25).
-------------------
Our Nation’s history has been mostly told, retold, and written through the perspectives of settlers and settler-descendants using this type of popular anti-conquest language. As Walter Hixson writes: “The settler seeks to establish a nation, and therefore needs to become native and to write the epic of the nation’s origin… Becoming the indigene required not only cleansing of the land, either through killing or removing, but sanitizing the historical record as well (26).” When we use Indigenous players in these types of fictional narratives passed off as real history, we are “sanitizing the historical record” - using their imagery, their culture, their bodies to justify Anglo actions otherwise unjustifiable, like the English pressuring Wampanoags to part with their lands, resulting in conflicts leading to land-loss penalties, and encouraging debts often ONLY payable by land (in Puritan courts). The pattern is clear - acquiring Native Peoples’ lands at any cost, by almost any means, followed by a strong case of “settler amnesia.” And for those Wampanoags that remained after (the ones not killed by soldiers, or waves of foreign-brought diseases, and the ones not made slaves and shipped out to Caribbean plantations), the English and later Americans continued a pattern of willful genocide, first by penalizing and then by denying the Wampanoag’s “Indianess” despite the fact they continued to be Wampanoag - living as Wampanoags in Wampanoag communities (27).
------------------
Among the bad and the ugly, there was good
The English and Wampanoag made overtures to each other, honoring their alliance to benefit their own. For two cultures so very different it’s certainly something to admire. And for the Wampanoag who chose to offer the English some level of their trust despite their disastrous history with previous European contact, it’s truly remarkable they extended themselves insofar as they did to the Pilgrims (though it has been pointed out Wampanoag motivation to do so may have mostly lied in their depleted population, devastated by epidemics - the Wampanoag sought alliance with the English to help protect themselves from enemy neighbors who escaped disease or faired better).
-------------------
But the “good” is only temporary… Wampanoag assistance to the English colony eventually ended in massive Wampanoag loss in freedom, land, and life at the hands of the Pilgrim’s descendants, other Puritans and fellow English colonists, and that shouldn’t be omitted. As Dennis Zotigh points out: "Presenting Thanksgiving to children as primarily a happy time trivializes our shared history and teaches a half-truth (28)." Embracing that truth... the full truth, the full story, is to include our fellow Americans, specifically those Wampanoag and other Indigenous people, who see the “First Thanksgiving” as a sorrowful end rather than a proud beginning (29). The American experience includes all American perspectives, all truths, even if knowing it makes us feel uncomfortable.
|
About the Terminology in This Article:
------------------
-“Thanksgiving” was not what the 1621 harvest celebration was called. However because we popularly refer to that harvest festival as the “First Thanksgiving,” and harvest celebrations as “thanksgivings” in general, I have chosen to use the term in describing the 1621 celebration as such. Historically speaking, “thanksgivings” were something else to the English, something more solemn, with more prayer and less feasting… like the 1623 Pilgrim Thanksgiving.
---------------
- I have chosen to use the popular term “Pilgrims” despite the fact that many Separatists may not have called themselves such. Many called themselves “Saints.” According to Plimoth Patuxet Museums, William Bradford, governor of Plymouth Colony, did refer to his fellow settlers as pilgrims. “Pilgrims” became a popular term in referring to the residents of Plymouth Colony in the 1800’s (30).
------------------------
- I use the term “Pilgrims” interchangeably with “English.” Both Separatists and non-separatist colonists were part of Plymouth Colony, and in my article I mean “Pilgrims” and “English” to encompass them both as a single Plymouth population in contrast to the Wampanoag population.
------------------
- Puritans, unlike Pilgrims, were non-separatists belonging to the Church fo England (yet many writers refer to both Separatists and non-separatists as “Puritans”). Separatists and non-separatists both colonized Southern New England.
----------------
- I use the spelling “Plymouth” when referring to the early colony. Plimoth-Patuxet Museums uses “Plimoth” (Governor Bradford’s spelling) to differentiate the historical colony from the modern town. The museum states: “There were no rules for the spelling of English words in the early 17th century” and “Plymouth, Plimouth, Plymoth, and Plimoth” were some of the ways the colony name was spelled (31).
|
Articles highlighting Indigenous perspectives on Thanksgiving:
----------------
----------------------
|
Notes:
(1) “In an analysis of how American history was taught in the 1920’s, Bessie Pierce pointed out the political uses to which Thanksgiving is put:…“the pupil is urged to follow in the footsteps of his forebears, to offer unquestioning obedience to the law of the land,…” -James W. Loewen, “Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong.” p. 88. “School History as Heritage: A Process of Indoctrination” “According to Lowenthal, heritage is, “not a testable…account of some past, but a declaration of faith in the past.” “[Heritage] uses historical traces and tells historical tales, but these tales and traces are stitched into fables that are open neither to critical analysis nor to comparative scrutiny.” “In opposition to heritage, history “[aims] to reduce bias, demands reinterpretation, conforms to evidence accessible to all trying to tell the truth [but] being aware that the truth is chameleon and its chroniclers fallible beings.” “This is the fundamental difference between heritage and history: heritage aims to create faith in mythologies while history seeks to inquire endlessly. The former attempts to stabilize the past; the latter destabilizes it by its method.” Concerning “holiday history,” “No longer would the stories of American heroes and the nation’s accomplishments be systematically taught to young children. Instead, what appeared was a smattering of disconnected images in the form of “holiday history” blips on the curricular radar tracking the teaching of Americans history through elementary school.” -Timothy D. Slekar, “Disciplinary History Versus Curricular Heritage: Epistemological Battle.” from “Journal of Thought” Vol. 36, no. 3 (Fall 2001) pgs. 64,67.
(2) Before “The First Encounter”: “they espied five or six people, with a dog, coming towards them, who were savages; who, when they saw them, ran into the wood and whistled the dog after them,… after they knew them to be Indians they marched after them into the woods,… when the Indians saw our men following them, they ran away with might and main, our men turned out into the wood after them,…” After failing to run down the locals, to meet with, they came across their old corn fields and a cache, which ended up being a grave, to which the Pilgrims returned the grave goods upon realization. “We deemed them graves,… and left the rest untouched, because we thought it would be odious unto them to ransack their sepulchres.” They moved on to where a house had once been were they “found a great kettle, which had been some ship’s kettle brought out of Europe” and dug up baskets with “goodly ears of corn.” “…we concluded to take the kettle, and as much of the corn as we could carry away with us…” (With the promise to satisfy their debt when they were able to meet with the locals). What they could not take the English buried again. Later the Pilgrims dug up another grave, which they believed to be of a European man (and small child) buried in Native-fashion with many grave offerings. The Pilgrims “brought sundry of the prettiest things away” with them, before covering the corpse up again. Afterwards they essentially raided two furnished homes, noting corn, fish, wooden bowls, earthenware pots, an English pail, fine mats and more to be in the homes. “Some of the best things we took away with us…” failing to leave compensation in their hasty retreat, but noting that when they finally meet with them later they “will give them full satisfaction.” Days later, the Pilgrims saw some Natives again… “As we drew near to the shore we espied some ten or twelve Indians, very busy about a black thing… they saw us, and ran to and fro, as if they had been carrying some thing away.” The next day the Pilgrims saw it was “a grampus which they were cutting up…” Then they “followed the tract of the Indians’ bare feet a good way on the sands” and into the woods where they found an old corn field, some old homes/structures, and a grave site. They dug up a cache of baskets containing parched acorns. The Pilgrims were driven by their desperation and saw themselves as merely borrowing from the locals, ready to compensate once making peaceful contact. (And according to Wm. Bradford, “about six months later, they did.”) However Wampanoag folks probably saw strangers chasing them off (they were not ready or wanting to make contact), raiding their homes, stealing their vital food stores, even desecrating their graves. All this likely leads to “The First Encounter”: “Anon, all upon a sudden, we heard a great and strange cry,… One of our company…came running in, and cried, “They are men, Indians! Indians!” And withal their arrows came flying amongst us; our men ran out with all speed to recover their arms…” The Captain “made a shot, and after him another… Our men were no sooner come to their arms, but the enemy was ready to assault them.” The episode ends with no casualties to the English, though it’s noted “some coats which hung up in our barricade were shot through and through.” Indeed the Pilgrims recovered several arrows. It’s believed the Wampanoag attackers withdrew without casualties as well. The Pilgrims “called this place, “The First Encounter.” -“Mourt’s Relation: A Journal of the Pilgrims at Plymouth.” pgs. 8-26. After landing at the new site of their colony: “All this while the Indians came skulking about those who were ashore and would sometimes show themselves aloof, at a distance, but when any approached them, they would run away.” - William Bradford, “Of Plymouth Plantation.” pg. 51. The Wampanoag were clearly avoiding contact, though keeping tabs on the Pilgrims’ doings. Many were probably going about their seasonal business despite the fact foreigners, possibly dangerous, had taken up real-estate on land they usually harvest foods from. And most likely, the Wampanoag were hoping they didn’t have to make contact, assuming the Pilgrims might just pick up and leave, like other European ships before them. However the construction of the Pilgrims’ first building (establishing the colony) probably shattered those hopes, and thus the Wampanoag sent forth Samoset, a man who had some skill translating the English language (just before Tisquantum enters the picture).
(3) Or even pressure from fellow teachers to keep the status quo. Sometimes all teachers must be on board to enact changes involving joint classroom traditions. Such a situation transpired involving the history park I worked for, when a young teacher attempted to initiate a change in field trip venues only to be reduced to tears by what she saw as a bias refusal, that came off as almost bullying. Thus her own class was resigned to participate in what she believed was an ineffective educational experience. (From personal correspondence with Sheryl Hartman, 2005)
(4) Jeremy Bangs, “The Truth About Thanksgiving Is that the Debunkers Are Wrong.” https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/15002
(5) “The First Thanksgiving, as our national origin myth, complete with Pilgrim hats made out of construction paper and Indian braves with feathers in their hair.” “Thanksgiving dinner is a ritual, with all the characteristics that Mircea Eliade assigns to the ritual observances of origin myths: 1. It constitutes the history of the acts of the founders, the Supernaturals. 2. It is considered to be true. 3. It tells how an institution came into existence. 4. In performing the ritual associated with the myth, one “experiences knowledge of the origin” and claims one’s patriarchy. 5. Thus one “lives” the myth, as a religion.” -James W. Loewen, “Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong.” pgs. 88-89.
(6) “First Thanksgiving” should be kept in context. Indigenous Peoples have observed their own harvest celebrations and thanksgiving ceremonies for thousands of years in North America. Likewise Europeans of diverse backgrounds have also celebrated their own well before putting a foot on the shores of North America. The 1621 “First Thanksgiving” is in fact not celebrated by the first Europeans in North America, though it is the first in New England that we are aware of. Keep in mind before Pilgrims land in 1620, the Dutch and French had already been trading with Native populations near and further away from what would become the Plymouth Colony. And other English had established a colony earlier in Virginia… And the Spanish, along with a large number of African slaves, had established colonies in the southern regions of the now U.S. much earlier than Plymouth Colony, not without failures (Fort Raleigh/NPS). “First Thanksgivings” before the Pilgrim’s Thanksgiving, according to some traditions, took place in what is now Texas, Florida, and Virginia (James Loewen).
(7) Laurence M. Hauptmann and James D. Wherry, “The Pequots in Southern New England: The Fall and Rise of an American Indian Nation.” pgs. 76-77.
(8) See the Mashantucket Pequot Museum & Research Center: https://www.pequotmuseum.org
(9) “The Pilgrims had nothing to do with it; not until the 1890’s did they even get included in the tradition.” From “Lies my Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong” by James W. Loewen, p. 90.
(10) Edward Winslow, a Letter Sent From New England to a friend in these parts, setting forth a brief and true Declaration of the worth of that Plantation; As also certain useful Directions for such as intend a Voyage into those Parts. “Mourt’s Relation: A Journal of the Pilgrims at Plymouth.”
(11) Speaking about another infamous European-Native American interaction: “Textbooks Make Up Details about Columbus To Avoid Uncertainty… They present cut-and-dried answers, avoiding uncertainty or controversy.” “They are certain about facts that people who have spent years studying Columbus say we cannot be sure of.” Replace “Columbus” with the “First Thanksgiving,” and the same applies. From “Lies My Teacher Told Me About Christopher Columbus: What Your History Books Got Wrong” by James W. Loewen, pgs. 16-17.
(12) National Geographic Kids: https://kids.nationalgeographic.com/history/article/first-thanksgiving , retrieved 10/2/22.
(13) David Kindy, “How to Tell the Thanksgiving Story on Its 400th Anniversary,” Smithsonian Magazine: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/what-really-happened-at-the-first-thanksgiving-180979108/ However the letter does mention Native women in it, though not relating to the harvest celebration, so it’s not like Winslow just refused to speak of the existence of Wampanoag women, or he spoke of them when he felt it mattered. Winslow was likely trying to convince his correspondent of just how important they (English) were treated by the Wampanoag, as evidenced in their “king” and his force spending three days at the colony during a celebration. Why would men only be in attendance? One reason is if this was considered a diplomatic affair. While women were a part of Wampanoag government, it’s likely their wishes and influence in matters were carried out by spokesmen during meetings with foreign leadership (like their neighbors). With that said, women sachems, to which the Wampanoag famously had, would have been in attendance for formal dialogue if it included the communities they represented. Second, if we entertain the Wampanoag explanation that the men showed up because of the blasts of firearms, then it was a group of warriors ready to possibly defend the colony or themselves. Thus another reason why only Native men may have been present for the 1621 harvest celebration.
(14) “Squanto: The True Story of the Native American Behind the First Thanksgiving” by Gina Dimuro, updated 11/9/21, retrieved 10/2/22.
(15) “They had to be invited,”…“To get that many men together and organized and travel to Plymouth was a big deal.” -Darius Coombs, from “How to Tell the Thanksgiving Story on Its 400th Anniversary,” Smithsonian Magazine: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/what-really-happened-at-the-first-thanksgiving-180979108/ - “The Pilgrims attempted to pattern their religious activities according to biblical precedent. The precedent for a harvest festival was the Feast of Tabernacles, Sukkoth (Deut. 16: 13-14), lasting seven days. The biblical injunction to include the “stranger” probably accounts for the Pilgrim’s inviting their Native neighbors to rejoice with them.” -Jeremy Bangs, “The Truth About Thanksgiving Is that the Debunkers Are Wrong.” https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/15002 - “According to one of the foremost experts on American Judaism, Dr. Jonathan Sarna, the biblical holiday did not exactly guide the Puritans’ thinking during colonial times, but they were generally influenced by the idea of thanking God for their bounty.” -Robert Gluck, “Did Sukkot help shape Thanksgiving?” https://www.jns.org/did-sukkot-help-shape-thanksgiving/
(16) “…her Providential interpretation of events rendered Indian motives irrelavant. Acts of seeming kindness and civility reflected God’s mercy, not her [Native] captors’ decency. If Indians fell short of their reputations for savagery, it was owing to divine intervention, not because Puritans had erred in their judgements.” -Kathleen M. Brown, “Foul Bodies: Cleanliness in Early America.” p. 78., “They are a people without any religion, or without knowledge of any God,…” -Edward Winslow, a Letter Sent From New England to a friend in these parts, setting forth a brief and true Declaration of the worth of that Plantation; As also certain useful Directions for such as intend a Voyage into those Parts. “Mourt’s Relation: A Journal of the Pilgrims at Plymouth.”
(17) William Bradford, “Of Plymouth Plantation.” p. 52. And for the record, Tisquantum wasn’t a simple tool put on earth for the good of the English… Tisquantum was an intelligent man who saw his friendship with the Pilgrims as strategic. He knew most information between the English and Natives flowed through himself. Tisquantum may have even been positioning himself for a leadership coup at the expense of Ousamequin, which both the Wampanoag chief and Bradford had become aware of during Tisquantum’s tenure as interpreter, teacher, and cultural ambassador. David J. Silverman, “This Land is Their Land: The Wampanoag Indians, Plymouth Colony, and the Troubled History of Thanksgiving.” p. 177-182.
(18) Some English who didn’t believe in working on Christmas Day (1621) were caught playing games: “some pitching the bar, some at stool-ball, and such like sports.” William Bradford “Of Plymouth Plantation.” p. 62. Pitching the bar involved “throwing a bar or log as far as possible.” And stool-ball “resembles cricket. A pitcher throws a ball at a target, usually a stool, though a tree or other object could be substituted. A second man tries to swat the ball away, either with his hand or a paddle, so that it doesn’t strike the stool. Points are scored for each ball successfully swatted away.” -“Seven Colonial New England Games.” https://www.newenglandhistoricalsociety.com/seven-colonial-new-england-games/
(19) The Wampanoag kept the English under watch before a formal, peaceful first meeting was made. And after the alliance was agreed to, Wampanoag persons traveling nearby or directly visiting the colony, along with a couple strategic Native translators staying with the English, much of the business of Plymouth wasn’t a secret to nearby Wampanoags.
(20) “The Wampanoags weren’t invited. Ousamequin and his men showed up only after the English in their revelry shot off some of their muskets. At the sound of gunfire, the Wampanoags came running, fearing they were headed to war. “One hundred warriors show up…” -Paula Peters (Mashpee Wampanoag), “This tribe helped the Pilgrims survive for their first Thanksgiving. They still regret it 400 years later.” By Dana Hedgpeth. https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2021/11/04/thanksgiving-anniversary-wampanoag-indians-pilgrims/ “Most historians believe what happened was Massasoit got word that there was a tremendous amount of gun fire coming from the Pilgrim village,” Turner said. “So he thought they were being attacked and he was going to bear aid.” -Tim Turner (Cherokee), Manager of Plimoth Plantation’s Wampanoag Homesite and co-owner of Native Plymouth Tours (2011). “The Wampanoag Side of the First Thanksgiving” by Michelle Tirado, https://indiancountrytoday.com/archive/the-wampanoag-side-of-the-first-thanksgiving-story
(21) David J. Silverman, “This Land is Their Land: The Wampanoag Indians, Plymouth Colony, and the Troubled History of Thanksgiving.” p. 156.
(22) Kathleen M. Brown, “Foul Bodies: Cleanliness in Early America.” p. 72.
(23) David J. Silverman, “This Land is Their Land: The Wampanoag Indians, Plymouth Colony, and the Troubled History of Thanksgiving.” p. 205. And keep in mind it was the devastating spread of disease introduced by Europeans that convinced Ousamequin to align his People with the Pilgrims: “The plague helped prompt the legendarily warm reception Plymouth enjoyed from the Wampanoags.” -James W. Loewen, from “Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American Textbook Got Wrong.” p. 76.
(24) “If colonists had not been able to occupy lands already cleared by Indian farmers who had vanished, colonization would have proceeded much more slowly. If Indian culture had not been devastated by the physical and psychological assaults it had suffered, colonizations might not have proceeded at all.” -Karen Kupperman from “Lies my Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong” by James W. Loewen, p. 77.
(25) Alfred A Cave “The Pequot War.” p. 11. The English did want to showcase their civility “in stark contrast with the barbarous cruelty of Spain’s conquistadors” by better treatment of Indigenous Peoples (proving their own superiority nationally and religiously), however they too found Native resources (land) too enticing not to kill and enslave Indigenous men, women, and children in order to obtain it. Jill Lepore, “The Name of War: King Philip’s War and the Origins of American Identity.” p. 9. James W. Loewen, “Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong.” p. 88.
(26) “Produced a language of settlement and anti-conquest that stressed the pioneer…entering a vast empty landscape left behind by Indians.” -James Joseph Buss, “Winning the West With Words: Language and Conquest in the Lower Great Lakes.” p. 69. Walter L. Hixson, “American Settler Colonialism: A History.” p. 11. “…white Americans came to define themselves in relation to an imagined Indian past. That definition, however, required that there be no Indians in the present,…” (referring to entertainment) -Jill Lepore, “The Name of War: King Philip’s War and the Origins of American Identity.” p. 193.
(27) David J. Silverman, “This Land is Their Land: The Wampanoag Indians, Plymouth Colony, and the Troubled History of Thanksgiving.” pgs. 400-410. Jill Lepore, “The Name of War: King Philip’s War and the Origins of American Identity.” pgs. 184-185.
(28) Dennis Zotigh, "Thanksgiving from an Indigenous Perspective." https://www.smithsonianmag.com/blogs/national-museum-american-indian/2022/11/23/thanksgiving-from-an-indigenous-perspective/
(29) “It is with mixed emotion that I stand here to share my thoughts. This is a time of celebration for you - celebrating an anniversary of a beginning for the white man in America. A time of looking back, of reflection. It is with a heavy heart that I look back upon what happened to my People.” -Wamsutta Frank B. James (Wampanoag). http://www.uaine.org/suppressed_speech.htm
(30) Plimoth Patuxet Museums: https://plimoth.org/for-students/homework-help/who-were-the-pilgrims
(31) Plimoth Patuxet Museums: https://plimoth.org/plan-your-visit/explore-our-sites/17th-century-english-village
|
Links for Teachers & Homeschooling Parents:
|
|