http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nicole-br ... 37722.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nicole-breedlove/thanksgiving-pequot-massacre_b_4337722.html)
Opinions? This is the first time I've heard this story and it seems a little low on backing information, so I'm not immediately convinced.
It wouldn't shock me, but what might shock me is if right wing and left wing news tabloid sites actually backed their stories with verifiable historical facts instead of assuming we should just buy it merely because it's on their sites.. :wink:
didn't get past the title. fuck these politically correct types.
bunch of self righteous pompous wet blankets if you ask me.
and btw I'm part native american. I'm Choctaw. I even get free healthcare because of it.
I do not celebrate the holiday, just as I do not celebrate any of them.
Well, I'll be damned. That explains the old episode of Northern Exposure where the village Indians celebrated Thanksgiving by putting up cut outs of skulls and throwing tomatoes at white people. It gave an incomplete explanation of why they did it. I've often thought I should read up about the holiday so I could understand what the script writers were trying to say.
It strikes me that I posted that in the wrong thread
whoops
Wow, that sent chills down my spine.
Total BS.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pequot_War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pequot_War)
QuoteBefore the war's inception, efforts to control fur trade access resulted in a series of escalating incidents and attacks that increased tensions on both sides. Political divisions between the Pequot and Mohegan widened as they aligned with different trade sources—the Mohegan with the English, and the Pequot with the Dutch. The Pequot assaulted a tribe of Indians who had tried to trade at what is known as Hartford. Tension sparked as the Massachusetts Bay Colony, became a stronghold for wampum, the supply of which the Pequot had controlled up until 1633.[citation?] John Stone, an English rogue, smuggler and privateer, and about seven of his crew were murdered by the Western tributary clients of the Pequot, the Niantic. According to the Pequots' later explanations, they did that in reprisal for the Dutch having murdered the principal Pequot sachem Tatobem, and were unaware of the fact that Stone was English and not Dutch.[8] In the earlier incident, Tatobem had boarded a Dutch vessel to trade. Instead of conducting trade, the Dutch seized the sachem and appealed for a substantial amount of ransom for his safe return. The Pequot quickly sent bushels of wampum, but received only Tatobem's dead body in return.
Stone, the privateer, was from the West Indies. He had been banished from Boston for malfeasance (including drunkenness, adultery and piracy). Since he was known to have powerful connections in other colonies as well as London, he was expected to use them against the Boston colony. Setting sail from Boston, Stone abducted two Western Niantic men, forcing them to show him the way up the Connecticut River. Soon after, he and his crew were suddenly attacked and killed by a larger group of Western Niantic.[9] While the initial reactions in Boston varied between indifference and outright joy at Stone's death,[10] the colonial officials later decided to protest the killing. They did not accept the Pequots' excuses that they had been unaware of Stone's nationality. The Pequot sachem Sassacus sent some wampum to atone for the murders, but refused the colonists' demands that the Western Niantic warriors responsible for Stone's death be turned over to them for trial and punishment.[11]
On July 20, 1636, a respected trader named John Oldham was attacked on a trading voyage to Block Island. He and several of his crew were killed and his ship looted by Narragansett-allied Indians who sought to discourage English settlers from trading with their Pequot rivals. In the weeks that followed, colonial officials from Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island, and Connecticut, assumed the Narragansett were the likely culprits. Knowing that the Indians of Block Island were allies of the Eastern Niantic, who were allied with the Narragansett, Puritan officials became suspicious of the Narragansett.[12] However, Narragansett leaders were able to convince the English that the perpetrators were being sheltered by the Pequots.
Wampum:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wampum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wampum)
There is a page on that wiki stating there is still a debate on the issue:
QuoteWhile it is still debated amongst scholars, some modern historians are in agreement that the national holiday of Thanksgiving found its origins in the memory of the Pequot War. [27] Certain historical misconceptions over time led to the mythologizing of the Thanksgiving story which was not one of a harvest celebration but as William Newell of the University of Connecticut has described as "A day of Thanksgiving, thanking God that they had eliminated over 700 men, women and children." And further notes that the governor of Massachusetts Bay Colony declared in 1637, "This day forth shall be a day of celebration and thanksgiving for subduing the Pequots." These facts have been largely relegated to the realms of esoterica due to mainstream and commercialist associations with the Thanksgiving holiday.[citation needed]
Which does show that it's not neccesarily BS, but not factual either. Apparently the subject is still open to debate.
Of course "citation needed" doesn't really lend much credibility either.
I'm still on the side of "unconvinced" on the whole topic. Evidence seems to be too sparse to really support it.
Thanks for the clarification. So basically, there were skirmishes, killings and plunderings that had started way back. And aren't we supposed to be created in God's image?!? So much for that.
So the pilgrims didn't REALLY land on Plymouth Rock, find some indians and sit down together for a Thanksgiving dinner that couldn't be beat?? Well slap my mouth! My 1st grade teacher, Miss Thompson lied? NO WAY DUDES! :shock:
The point of my post is that the Pequot were not just some totally innocent victims to the end game, but rather involved in an ongoing political trade war. The Pequot made the mistake of siding with the Dutch. Had they sided with the English, we might be visiting a Pequot Sun casino instead of a Mohegan Sun casino today. Also the author, regardless of her background, obviously has a bone to pick. Until I see a totally objective analysis of this I would remain skeptical. Also, there are a few different versions of how the holiday came to be.
The "known" part is how it was introduced first as a holiday by George Washington and then later formalized by congress in the 1940's. It was a regional holiday that spread over decades and finally became a national holiday.
Why would a massacre that happened in May be celebrated in November?
So..not all just thanking baby jebus for the bountiful harvest? I can't believe YOU people don't believe the stories told you as children. It's illegal to make up bullshit stories for kids isn't it? :)
Quote from: "AllPurposeAtheist"I can't believe YOU people don't believe the stories told you as children. It's illegal to make up bullshit stories for kids isn't it? :)
Santa Claus? Easter Bunny? Wait for it.......TOOTH FAIRY?
This article is silly. While there's no denying that the European settlers to North and South America conducted a large number of atrocities against the indigenous population, the origin of Thanksgiving is actually not from the pilgrims from the Mayflower at all.
Thanksgiving in the USA has its roots in Spanish settlement in North America, and continued in the Virginia Company's Jamestown settlement. All of this took place decades before the events the article describes in Massachusetts, so it's nonsense to say that it's the origin of Thanksgiving. In fact, there's no single event that could be said to be its origin at all, it was just a tradition that sprang up over the span of a few decades.
I was going to say, I thought it was partly associated with Onate's expedition into New Mexico and being aided by the locals.
Russell Means agreed with the premise, if not the details in his book "Where White Men Fear to Tread: The Autobiography of Russell Means." Great book, but to be taken with a grain of salt. There is (of course) a slant toward "Native Americans" (a term Means found offensive) and there is some woo factor stuff about medical science being bad for unborn children and native chanting fixing all that's wrong. Still, much of what he presents can be corroborated and gives a person pause at times, especially when considering some of the tales taught as fact about the American expansion.
Personally, I think the truth of the claims about Thanksgiving will never be sorted out unless someone builds a time machine and we go back to determine what actually happened. Were there people who thought we should have feasts of thanksgiving over the slaughter of the indigenous peoples of the North American continent? Probably. Were there counterparts among the indigenous peoples? Again, probably. To the victor go the spoils, and the ability to write the history books and certainly there are other claims for the reason behind the holiday. Some founded, others not no much. Still, it makes me thankful that we live in a society, no matter how biased, racist or discriminatory that would not currently condone the type of behavior described, whether it actually happened or not.
Some would call it "White Man Guilt," though I deny the concept as I have done nothing (as most people haven't) to be guilty of in this context, but I do feel some compassion, not only for the "Native Americans" but also for the "African Americans" and what was done to them. It's sad that this nation, founded as a "Melting Pot" had to start with two of the most egregious crimes against humanity, slavery and genocide.