« Nicholas Kristof: Sudan‘s Department of Gang Rape. | Main | PrescottSpeak. »
November 22, 2005
John Tierney: That First Thanksgiving.
John Tierney makes the point about what the Americas were like in the 1600s. The Native Indian populations were suffering horribly from the introduction of various European diseases a century earlier. Smallpox for one (landed with a slave from Cuba in 1502 apparenty) and others just as deadly to a population with no resistance (quite probably measles, mumps and TB).
I do like this though:
The Indians on Cape Cod,.... were appalled by their unhealthy, scraggly and dirty visitors.
Appalled perhaps but that’s a fairly common reaction to the arrival of a random group of Englishmen.
Tag john tierney
Depending on when and where you went to grade school, you've probably heard one of these versions of the first Thanksgiving:
1. After a kindly Indian named Squanto taught the Pilgrims to grow
corn, the Pilgrims invited the Indians to a meal to celebrate their
friendship and mutual desire to live in harmony.
2. The Pilgrims held a feast to thank God, the real hero of
Thanksgiving, who had earlier arranged for Squanto to be kidnapped,
brought to Europe, taught Christianity and then miraculously returned
just in time to help the Pilgrims.
3. The Indians, vicious barbarians awed by the Europeans' technology,
sought an alliance with the Pilgrims to get access to their steel tools
and enjoy the protection of their guns.
4. The Native Americans, a peaceable people who practiced sustainable
agriculture and lived as one with nature, innocently befriended the
Pilgrims without realizing these imperialists would destroy their lands
and wage genocidal wars.
The problem with all of these versions, even the last one about the
saintly Native American proto-environmentalists, is that they don't do
justice to the Pilgrims' guests. One way or another, the Indians come
off as primitive patsies embracing the powerful invaders.
These stories all suffer from a warped view of Indians as naifs that
afflicted the first settlers and persisted for centuries among
historians. It's the fallacy dubbed ''Holmberg's Mistake'' by Charles
Mann in his new book, ''1491,'' an intriguing revisionist history.
Holmberg's Mistake is named after an anthropologist in the 1940's who
concluded that the Bolivian Amazon had long been a primeval wilderness
inhabited by a few Stone Age tribes. But as later researchers found,
that landscape had been transformed by a large, prosperous society that
dug canals, raised earthworks and cleared forests to plant crops and
build cities.
The Indians who greeted European colonists may have seemed like
barbarians -- or, in later mythology, like Noble Savages -- but that
was only because their societies had been decimated by epidemics
brought by earlier Europeans. Before then, the Americas may well have
been more populous than Europe, and in some ways more advanced.
The Indians on Cape Cod, who had more productive farm fields and ate
more calories per capita than the typical person in Europe, were
appalled by their unhealthy, scraggly and dirty visitors. The English
guns were frightening at first, but the Indians quickly saw that the
weapons were inaccurate and could be defeated by bows and arrows.
The Northeastern Indians did covet some of the European goods, like
knives and beads, especially since they could get them by exchanging
the cheap furs they used as blankets. As Mann writes, ''It was like
happening upon a dingy kiosk that would swap fancy electronic goods for
customers' used socks -- almost anyone would be willing to overlook the
shopkeeper's peculiarities.''
But that didn't mean inviting these foreigners to stick around.
Tisquantum (the full name of Squanto) came from the Wampanoag
confederation, which had long traded with the Europeans while forcibly
preventing them from settling on Cape Cod. Their leader, Massasoit,
welcomed the Pilgrims only because so many Wampanoag Indians had died
from European diseases that they were in danger of being conquered by
other Indians.
This shrewd politician probably sought the alliance not so much for the
Pilgrims' guns, Mann writes, but because his enemies would be reluctant
to attack a group of whites for fear that it would complicate their own
relationships with white traders. And his emissary, Tisquantum, far
from a simple, kindly Indian, had his own plan for using the Pilgrims
to become leader himself. Shortly after that first Thanksgiving, he
tried unsuccessfully to trick the Pilgrims into attacking Massasoit.
''Tisquantum was to the Pilgrims what Ahmad Chalabi was to the
Americans in Iraq,'' Mann said. ''At a time when the Pilgrims were
really clueless, he introduced them to his society and provided
valuable information, but he definitely had his own agenda.'' Some
Pilgrims remained clueless, attributing their survival to God and their
guns, but others were more savvy.
''The Pilgrims figured out within a year they were dealing with a
complex, fractured society they had to understand in order to survive
abroad,'' Mann said. Some of their descendants in Washington aren't
such quick studies.
November 22, 2005 in History | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c2d3e53ef00d8349719c869e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference John Tierney: That First Thanksgiving.:
Comments
Oh, then I take it you've spent time in Prague?
Posted by: Dan Collins | Nov 22, 2005 7:35:53 PM
Misconceptions about American Indians are one of my pet peeves, especially when perpetuated by people that know little or nothing about their original way of life and the diversity of their cultures. They were not a monolithic race bound universally by the same traditions or customs. I once endured a lecture from a British fellow about how us big bad Americans could be so evil to such a kind, gentle race of people. The truth is some tribes were gentle, some were so brutal they rivaled the torture chambers of Medieval Europe in their barbarity. It's hard to know much about their past, since they didn't keep written records, but it's not that hard to look a little into the history we do have available to us before simplistic romanticizing of a complicated peoples and relations.
Posted by: Emily | Nov 22, 2005 9:17:58 PM
After some characteristically silly preaching by FDR, Churchill is said to have replied "Would you have us treat our Indians the way you treated yours?"
Posted by: dearieme | Nov 22, 2005 9:55:07 PM
