capstagethanksgiving - Tumblr blog

[capstagethanksgiving]

This 15 minute TED talk is a heartbreaking crash course on the treaties the U.S. has broken with the Lakota people.

[capstagethanksgiving]

Facts about Wars

To answer Michael’s question, European colonists and Indigenous Americans were at war more or less continuously from about 1600-1924 (324 years). This Wikipedia article is the most comprehensive and easy to absorb overview of these wars. As it says, estimates of the pre-colonial population of North America vary significantly, from 2-18 million, but it is generally believed that the population was less than half a million during the 1800s. Another very well-cited Wikipedia article, this is a list of massacres that includes estimated casualties.

Caden’s scene with the Native heads is 100% real, although it mashes up a couple of different colonist attacks:

John Mason’s attack was a part of the Pequot War in 1637 and it was barely a victory for the English:

The attack began at dawn on May 26th (Old Calendar – June 5 New calendar) when the English surrounded the 2-acre village and fired a volley through the gaps in the palisade. The force of 77 English, 60 Mohegan and 200 Narragansett surrounded the fort and the English fired a volley through the palisade walls. Mason and Underhill, with twenty men each, entered the fort through entrances on the northeast and southwest sides. Their objective was to "destroy them by the Sword and save the Plunder" (Mason). Unknown to the English the fort was reinforced the night before by 100 warriors from other villages, bringing the total number of warriors inside the fort to approximately 175.  Within 20 minutes English inside the fort suffered 50% casualties. It was then that Mason said: "We should never kill them after that manner: WE MUST BURN THEM!"

The English retreated outside the fort and surrounded it to prevent anyone escaping from the fort. Their Native allies formed a second line outside the English as depicted in the woodcut. The fire quickly spread from the northeast to the southwest forcing everyone in the fort to cluster in the southwest quadrant of the fort. Pequot warriors continued to battle the English from behind the palisade and the English fired at them through the gaps in the palisade.

"Captaine Mason entring into a Wigwam, brought out a fire-brand, after hee had wounded many in the house, then hee set fire on the West-side where he entred, my selfe set fire on the South end with a traine of Powder, the fires of both meeting in the center of the Fort blazed most terribly, and burnt all in the space of halfe an houre;many couragious fellowes were unwilling to come out, and fought most desperately through the Palisadoes, so as they were scorched and burnt with the very flame, and were deprived of their armes, in regard the fire burnt their very bowstrings, and so perished valiantly : mercy they did deserve for their valour, could we have had opportunitie to have bestowed it; many were burnt in the Fort, both men, women, and children, others forced out, and came in troopes to the Indians, twentie, and thirtie at a time, which our souldiers received and entertained with the point of the sword; downe fell men, women, and children, those that scaped us, fell into the hands of the Indians, that were in the reere of us; it is reported by themselves, that there were about foure hundred soules in this Fort, and not above five of them escaped out of our hands" (Underhill).

Later, in 1643, the Dutch were responsible for the incident with the heads:

The governor-general of New Netherland at that time, William Kieft, believed in a policy of harassment and extermination of Hudson River Indians to make room for Dutch settlers. He paid the Mohawk, traditional enemies of the Hudson River Algonquians, to attack the [Wappinger]. The Wappinger fled to the Dutch settlement at Pavonia for protection. Yet Dutch soldiers attacked the unsuspecting Indians while they slept, killing and beheading 80, many of them women and children, and taking 30 more as prisoners. The soldiers brought the 80 heads back to New Amsterdam, where they played kickball with them. They also publicly tortured many of the Indian prisoners. Governor-General Kieft is said to have “laughed right heartily” at the sight.

[capstagethanksgiving]

More on the National Day of Mourning

This is an interview from 2013, published by Between the Lines, that gives some context to the National Day of Mourning and  talks about the 1997 incident in Plymouth that’s referenced in the show. You can read more about the outcome of the events in 1997 on the UAINE website.

Thanksgiving Day marks the 44th annual Day of Mourning at Plymouth Rock, Mass., organized by the United American Indians of New England. The event was initiated in 1970 when Wampanoag leader Frank James was asked to give a speech at a Boston celebration of the friendship between the Pilgrims and the native people they met, who helped them survive.

James submitted his proposed speech, based on the writings of a Pilgrim settler, which described the mistreatment of the natives by the English, but was told the speech could not be delivered. In response, he put the call out for native people to gather in Plymouth, to mourn instead of celebrate, and to voice their demands for self-determination, an end to racism – and since 1977 – freedom for imprisoned Native American activist Leonard Peltier.

Between The Lines’ Melinda Tuhus spoke with Moonanum James, the son of event founder Frank James, who now serves as coleader of the United American Indians of New England. Here, James describes the Thanksgiving day Mourning event, some of their current demands, and explains why his group embraces the participation of non-natives in their Thanksgiving Day protest.

MOONANUM JAMES: Well, at noon we gather on Cole's Hill, and we have a speakout where only native people are allowed to speak, and the reason we go to Cole's Hill is there's a statue of Massasoit on it, and Massasoit was the supreme sachem of the Wampanoag when the Pilgrims arrived, and I'm a Wampanoag myself. And the speak-out might take an hour, hour and a half just depending on the number of people who want to speak. And then we have a march; we go down by Plymouth Rock, and I say a few words about how ridiculous the mythology behind Plymouth Rock. And then we go down to Post Office Square, which is where King Philip, or Metacom's head – and Metacom was the youngest son of Massasoit – who would become chief. And when he was killed, the English cut off his head and both his hands, and sent one to Boston and one to England, but they displayed his head on a pike for over 20 years in Post Office Square. And after we have a little gathering there, a little bit of a rally, we go in and we have a social and over the last few years we've been feeding 3, 4, 500 people. We don't keep a count – just anyone who needs a meal, they come and we'll feed 'em.

BETWEEN THE LINES: I understand the violence isn't all in the distant past, right?

MOONANUM JAMES: In 1997, 25 of us were arrested basically for marching on our own land. Twenty-five people were pepper-sprayed, thrown to the ground, handcuffed and taken to jail. And after a long negotiation process – the ACLU got involved, it's quite complicated – we were able to reach an agreement with Plymouth. They dropped all the charges; we have two beautiful historical markers in town; one in Cole's Hill tells people why we're there, why we've been there since 1970, and we also have one in Post Office Square that addresses King Philip's head being displayed on a pike. So some of the goals we've been able to get; getting all those charges dropped; we got some funds to start an education project; no individual got any money. And every year (Leonard Peltier) sends a statement to us, and we do demand freedom for him. Another one of our demands is that the Bureau of Indian Affairs pay up. They owe billions of dollars in royalties for oil drilling leases, land use leases, all over the country. We also demand that the sports teams stop using racist logos.

BETWEEN THE LINES: I know the day also includes solidarity with native activist Leonard Pelter, who was convicted in 1977 of killing two FBI agents on the Pine Ridge reservation in South Dakota in a trial that's considered by many to be completely corrupt.

MOONANUM JAMES: Well, it's been a number of years. Every year we call for clemency, for him getting out of jail, because even the government in open court has said they don't know who's responsible for shooting those FBI officers, and yet he's still sitting in prison. It's just a sad thing. And every year he sends a statement to us, and we do demand freedom for him. Another one of our demands is that the Bureau of Indian Affairs pay up. They owe billions of dollars in royalties for oil drilling leases, land use leases, all over the country, and this money seems to be nowhere; they can't find it. We also demand that the sports teams stop using racist logos and things of that nature. I don't like the term Washington Redskins. I don't think anyone would like the term Jersey Jews, if you know what I'm getting at.

BETWEEN THE LINES: So you all are involved in a lot of native American struggles...

MOONANUM JAMES: Oh, yeah, we're involved in such things as getting food for the reservations, heat for the reservations, good medical care. I mean, after all, we have the highest suicide rate, the highest alcoholism rate of just about any group in this country. You know, some people have to make the choice between heating or eating. So we demand things along those lines, because we have people who come from a lot of these reservations and speak, talking about the conditions they face every day, and believe me, it's not going to a casino and getting a nice warm meal. Sometimes it's just trying to get a meal.

BETWEEN THE LINES: So what do you serve at the dinner? Is it what most Americans consider traditional Thanksgiving fare, or native foods, or what?

MOONANUM JAMES: We serve a variety of things, because we have vegans that come, we have vegetarians that come. We have, of course, turkey and ham and chowders and soups and breads and pies and pastries, coffee, tea – you name it. The only thing we don't serve is alcohol.

BETWEEN THE LINES: I've heard the criticism that United American Indians of New England is actually mostly non-native.

MOONANUM JAMES: I wouldn't want to hazard a guess as to who's native, who's not native, because the people that come support us, whether they're green, white, pink. The issue is to stand in solidarity. It's really difficult and that criticism has been raised many, many times, but I don't want to turn it into a native people-only kind of thing; I prefer to look out and see people from the four directions, which means more to me than whether it's a native day, or whatever, because years and years ago, we did have mostly native people show up up there, and we decided that it should be expanded, that we should look out beyond just native people and invite everybody who'd like to participate and march with us. The only stipulation we still hold – and this is the way the elders set it up in 1970 – is, we don't need the so-called experts telling us anything. We're more than capable of speaking for ourselves.

[capstagethanksgiving]

What they don’t teach you in school

Both of these books are constantly on hold at the library, but you can read some relevant sections in their Google Books previews:

A People’s History of the United States, by Howard Zinn, starts with a great contextualization of Columbus and the Spaniards’ conquest of the Caribbean. Check out Chapter 1.

Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong, by James Loewen, has a couple of chapters addressing the European colonization of North America, starting with the Spanish and moving on to the Eastern seaboard settlements. Check out Chapter 3, “The Truth About the First Thanksgiving,” and most of Chapter 4, “Red Eyes.”

[capstagethanksgiving]

Storytelling

While we’re on the subject of the importance bring Indigenous voices into the American theatre, here are some resources about the importance of storytelling in Indigenous cultures:

In this video, Roger Fernandes (Lower Elwha Band of the S'Klallam Indians) talks about the role of storytelling in our lives: 

You can also listen to him telling stories on the Since Time Immemorial website.

And you can listen to Vi Hilbert (Upper Skagit elder) tell stories in English and Lushootseed, as well as talking about storytelling, on the University of Washington’s Voices of the First People archive.

[capstagethanksgiving]

Time lapse of U.S. government maps showing the shockingly fast collapse of Indigenous land holdings from 1784 and 1895

[capstagethanksgiving]

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. Even before the Pilgrims landed it was common practice for explorers to capture Indians, take them to Europe and sell them as slaves for 220 shillings apiece. The Pilgrims had hardly explored the shores of Cape Cod for four days before they had robbed the graves of my ancestors and stolen their corn and beans. Mourt's Relation describes a searching party of sixteen men. Mourt goes on to say that this party took as much of the Indians' winter provisions as they were able to carry. Massasoit, the great Sachem of the Wampanoag, knew these facts, yet he and his People welcomed and befriended the settlers of the Plymouth Plantation. Perhaps he did this because his Tribe had been depleted by an epidemic. Or his knowledge of the harsh oncoming winter was the reason for his peaceful acceptance of these acts. This action by Massasoit was perhaps our biggest mistake. We, the Wampanoag, welcomed you, the white man, with open arms, little knowing that it was the beginning of the end; that before 50 years were to pass, the Wampanoag would no longer be a free people.

In 1970, to celebrate the 350th anniversary of the Puritans’ landing at Plymouth, Frank James (Wampanoag) was asked to deliver a speech. When the event planners read his prepared remarks, they rescinded their invitation and his speech was never delivered.

[capstagethanksgiving]

A series of 11 Thanksgiving myths challenged by research into Wampanoag history of the 1600s

by Judy Dow (Abenaki) and Beverly Slapin Revised 06/12/06

What is it about the story of “The First Thanksgiving” that makes it essential to be taught in virtually every grade from preschool through high school? What is it about the story that is so seductive? Why has it become an annual elementary school tradition to hold Thanksgiving pageants, with young children dressing up in paper-bag costumes and feather-duster headdresses and marching around the schoolyard? Why is it seen as necessary for fake “pilgrims” and fake “Indians” (portrayed by real children, many of whom are Indian) to sit down every year to a fake feast, acting out fake scenarios and reciting fake dialogue about friendship? And why do teachers all over the country continue (for the most part, unknowingly) to perpetuate this myth year after year after year?

Is it because as Americans we have a deep need to believe that the soil we live on and the country on which it is based was founded on integrity and cooperation? This belief would help contradict any feelings of guilt that could haunt us when we look at our role in more recent history in dealing with other indigenous peoples in other countries. If we dare to give up the “myth” we may have to take responsibility for our actions both concerning indigenous peoples of this land as well as those brought to this land in violation of everything that makes us human. The realization of these truths untold might crumble the foundation of what many believe is a true democracy. As good people, can we be strong enough to learn the truths of our collective past? Can we learn from our mistakes? This would be our hope.

We offer these myths and facts to assist students, parents and teachers in thinking critically about this holiday, and deconstructing what we have been taught about the history of this continent and the world. (Note: We have based our “fact” sections in large part on the research, both published and unpublished, that Abenaki scholar Margaret M. Bruchac developed in collaboration with the Wampanoag Indian Program at Plimoth Plantation. We thank Marge for her generosity. We thank Doris Seale and Lakota Harden for their support.)

Myth #1: “The First Thanksgiving” occurred in 1621.

Fact: No one knows when the “first” thanksgiving occurred. People have been giving thanks for as long as people have existed. Indigenous nations all over the world have celebrations of the harvest that come from very old traditions; for Native peoples, thanksgiving comes not once a year, but every day, for all the gifts of life. To refer to the harvest feast of 1621 as “The First Thanksgiving” disappears Indian peoples in the eyes of non-Native children.

Myth #2: The people who came across the ocean on the Mayflower were called Pilgrims.

Fact: The Plimoth settlers did not refer to themselves as “Pilgrims.” Pilgrims are people who travel for religious reasons, such as Muslims who make a pilgrimage to Mecca. Most of those who arrived here from England were religious dissidents who had broken away from the Church of England. They called themselves “Saints”; others called them “Separatists.” Some of the settlers were “Puritans,” dissidents but not separatists who wanted to “purify” the Church. It wasn’t until around the time of the American Revolution that the name “Pilgrims” came to be associated with the Plimoth settlers, and the “Pilgrims” became the symbol of American morality and Christian faith, fortitude, and family. (1)

Myth #3: The colonists came seeking freedom of religion in a new land.

Fact: The colonists were not just innocent refugees from religious persecution. By 1620, hundreds of Native people had already been to England and back, most as captives; so the Plimoth colonists knew full well that the land they were settling on was inhabited. Nevertheless, their belief system taught them that any land that was “unimproved” was “wild” and theirs for the taking; that the people who lived there were roving heathens with no right to the land. Both the Separatists and Puritans were rigid fundamentalists who came here fully intending to take the land away from its Native inhabitants and establish a new nation, their “Holy Kingdom.” The Plimoth colonists were never concerned with “freedom of religion” for anyone but themselves. (2)

Myth #4: When the “Pilgrims” landed, they first stepped foot on “Plymouth Rock.”

Fact: When the colonists landed, they sought out a sandy inlet in which to beach the little shallop that carried them from the Mayflower to the mainland. This shallop would have been smashed to smithereens had they docked at a rock, especially a Rock. Although the Plimoth settlers built their homes just up the hill from the Rock, William Bradford in Mourt’s Relation: A Journal of the Pilgrims at Plymouth, does not even mention the Rock; writing only that they “unshipped our shallop and drew her on land.” (3) The actual “rock” is a slab of Dedham granodiorite placed there by a receding glacier some 20,000 years ago. It was first referred to in a town surveying record in 1715, almost 100 years after the landing. Since then, the Rock has been moved, cracked in two, pasted together, carved up, chipped apart by tourists, cracked again, and now rests as a memorial to something that never happened. (4)

It’s quite possible that the myth about the “Pilgrims” landing on a “Rock” originated as a reference to the New Testament of the Christian bible, in which Jesus says to Peter, “And I say also unto thee, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church and the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it.” (Matthew 16:18) The appeal to these scriptures gives credence to the sanctity of colonization and the divine destiny of the dominant culture. Although the colonists were not dominant then, they behaved as though they were.

Myth #5: The Pilgrims found corn.

Fact: Just a few days after landing, a party of about 16 settlers led by Captain Myles Standish followed a Nauset trail and came upon an iron kettle and a cache of Indian corn buried in the sand. They made off with the corn and returned a few days later with reinforcements. This larger group “found” a larger store of corn, about ten bushels, and took it. They also “found” several graves, and, according to Mourt’s Relation, “brought sundry of the prettiest things away” from a child’s grave and then covered up the corpse. They also “found” two Indian dwellings and “some of the best things we took away with us.” (5) There is no record that restitution was ever made for the stolen corn, and the Wampanoag did not soon forget the colonists’ ransacking of Indian graves. (6)

Myth #6: Samoset appeared out of nowhere, and along with Squanto became friends with the Pilgrims. Squanto helped the Pilgrims survive and joined them at “The First Thanksgiving.”

Fact: Samoset, an eastern Abenaki chief, was the first to contact the Plimoth colonists. He was investigating the settlement to gather information and report to Massasoit, the head sachem in the Wampanoag territory. In his hand, Samoset carried two arrows: one blunt and one pointed. The question to the settlers was: are you friend or foe? Samoset brought Tisquantum (Squanto), one of the few survivors of the original Wampanoag village of Pawtuxet, to meet the English and keep an eye on them. Tisquantum had been taken captive by English captains several years earlier, and both he and Samoset spoke English. Tisquantum agreed to live among the colonists and serve as a translator. Massasoit also sent Hobbamock and his family to live near the colony to keep an eye on the settlement and also to watch Tisquantum, whom Massasoit did not trust. The Wampanoag oral tradition says that Massasoit ordered Tisquantum killed after he tried to stir up the English against the Wampanoag. Massasoit himself lost face after his years of dealing with the English only led to warfare and land grabs. Tisquantum is viewed by Wampanoag people as a traitor, for his scheming against other Native people for his own gain. Massasoit is viewed as a wise and generous leader whose affection for the English may have led him to be too tolerant of their ways. (7)

Myth #7: The Pilgrims invited the Indians to celebrate the First Thanksgiving.

Fact: According to oral accounts from the Wampanoag people, when the Native people nearby first heard the gunshots of the hunting colonists, they thought that the colonists were preparing for war and that Massasoit needed to be informed. When Massasoit showed up with 90 men and no women or children, it can be assumed that he was being cautious. When he saw there was a party going on, his men then went out and brought back five deer and lots of turkeys. (8)

In addition, both the Wampanoag and the English settlers were long familiar with harvest celebrations. Long before the Europeans set foot on these shores, Native peoples gave thanks every day for all the gifts of life, and held thanksgiving celebrations and giveaways at certain times of the year. The Europeans also had days of thanksgiving, marked by religious services. So the coming together of two peoples to share food and company was not entirely a foreign thing for either. But the visit that by all accounts lasted three days was most likely one of a series of political meetings to discuss and secure a military alliance. Neither side totally trusted the other: The Europeans considered the Wampanoag soulless heathens and instruments of the devil, and the Wampanoag had seen the Europeans steal their seed corn and rob their graves. In any event, neither the Wampanoag nor the Europeans referred to this feast/meeting as “Thanksgiving.” (9)

Myth #8: The Pilgrims provided the food for their Indian friends.

Fact: It is known that when Massasoit showed up with 90 men and saw there was a party going on, they then went out and brought back five deer and lots of turkeys. Though the details of this event have become clouded in secular mythology, judging by the inability of the settlers to provide for themselves at this time and Edward Winslow’s letter of 1622 (10), it is most likely that Massasoit and his people provided most of the food for this “historic” meal. (11)

Myth #9: The Pilgrims and Indians feasted on turkey, potatoes, berries, cranberry sauce, pumpkin pie, and popcorn.

Fact: Both written and oral evidence show that what was actually consumed at the harvest festival in 1621 included venison (since Massasoit and his people brought five deer), wild fowl, and quite possibly nasaump-dried corn pounded and boiled into a thick porridge, and pompion-cooked, mashed pumpkin. Among the other food that would have been available, fresh fruits such as plums, grapes, berries and melons would have been out of season. It would have been too cold to dig for clams or fish for eels or small fish. There were no boats to fish for lobsters in rough water that was about 60 fathoms deep. There was not enough of the barley crop to make a batch of beer, nor was there a wheat crop. Potatoes and sweet potatoes didn’t get from the south up to New England until the 18th century, nor did sweet corn. Cranberries would have been too tart to eat without sugar to sweeten them, and that’s probably why they wouldn’t have had pumpkin pie, either. Since the corn of the time could not be successfully popped, there was no popcorn. (12)

Myth #10: The Pilgrims and Indians became great friends.

Fact: A mere generation later, the balance of power had shifted so enormously and the theft of land by the European settlers had become so egregious that the Wampanoag were forced into battle. In 1637, English soldiers massacred some 700 Pequot men, women and children at Mystic Fort, burning many of them alive in their homes and shooting those who fled. The colony of Connecticut and Massachusetts Bay Colony observed a day of thanksgiving commemorating the massacre. By 1675, there were some 50,000 colonists in the place they had named “New England.” That year, Metacom, a son of Massasoit, one of the first whose generosity had saved the lives of the starving settlers, led a rebellion against them. By the end of the conflict known as “King Philip’s War,” most of the Indian peoples of the Northeast region had been either completely wiped out, sold into slavery, or had fled for safety into Canada. Shortly after Metacom’s death, Plimoth Colony declared a day of thanksgiving for the English victory over the Indians. (13)

Myth #11: Thanksgiving is a happy time.

Fact: For many Indian people, “Thanksgiving” is a time of mourning, of remembering how a gift of generosity was rewarded by theft of land and seed corn, extermination of many from disease and gun, and near total destruction of many more from forced assimilation. As currently celebrated in this country, “Thanksgiving” is a bitter reminder of 500 years of betrayal returned for friendship.

[capstagethanksgiving]

A brief recounting of the first Thanksgiving

Too often the story of the 1621 Thanksgiving is told from the Pilgrims’ point of view, and when the Wampanoag, who partook in this feast too, are included, it is usually in a brief or distorted way. In search of the Native American perspective, we looked to Plymouth, where the official first Thanksgiving took place and where today the Wampanoag side of the story can be found.

Plimoth Plantation is one of Plymouth’s top attractions and probably the place to go for the first Thanksgiving story. It is a living museum, with its replica 17th century Wampanoag Homesite, a representation of the homesite used by Hobbamock, who served as emissary between the Wampanoag and Pilgrims, and staffed by 23 Native Americans, mostly Wampanoag; 17th century English Village; and the Mayflower II, a replica of the ship that brought the Pilgrims to Plymouth.

According to a Plimoth Plantation timeline, the Mayflower arrived at Plymouth Harbor on December 16, 1620. The Pilgrims settled in an area that was once Patuxet, a Wampanoag village abandoned four years prior after a deadly outbreak of a plague, brought by European traders who first appeared in the area in 1616. The museum’s literature tells that before 1616, the Wampanoag numbered 50,000 to 100,000, occupying 69 villages scattered throughout southeastern Massachusetts and eastern Rhode Island. The plague, however, killed thousands, up to two-thirds, of them. Many also had been captured and sold as slaves.

And yet, when the Wampanoag watched the Mayflower’s passengers come ashore at Patuxet, they did not see them as a threat. “The Wampanoag had seen many ships before,” explained Tim Turner, Cherokee, manager of Plimoth Plantation’s Wampanoag Homesite and co-owner of Native Plymouth Tours. “They had seen traders and fishermen, but they had not seen women and children before. In the Wampanoag ways, they never would have brought their women and children into harm. So, they saw them as a peaceful people for that reason.”

But they did not greet them right away either. The English, in fact, did not see the Wampanoag that first winter at all, according to Turner. “They saw shadows,” he said. Samoset, a Monhegan from Maine, came to the village on March 16, 1621. The next day, he returned with Tisquantum (Squanto), a Wampanoag who befriended and helped the English that spring, showing them how to plant corn, fish and gather berries and nuts. That March, the Pilgrims entered into a treaty of mutual protection with Ousamequin (Massasoit), the Pokanoket Wampanoag leader.

Turner said what most people do not know about the first Thanksgiving is that the Wampanoag and Pilgrims did not sit down for a big turkey dinner and it was not an event that the Wampanoag knew about or were invited to in advance. In September/October 1621, the Pilgrims had just harvested their first crops, and they had a good yield. They “sent four men on fowling,” which comes from the one paragraph account by Pilgrim Edward Winslow, one of only two historical sources of this famous harvest feast. Winslow also stated, “we exercised our arms.” “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.”

When the Wampanoag showed up, they were invited to join the Pilgrims in their feast, but there was not enough food to feed the chief and his 90 warriors. “He [Massasoit] sends his men out, and they bring back five deer, which they present to the chief of the English town [William Bradford]. So, there is this whole ceremonial gift-giving, as well. When you give it as a gift, it is more than just food,” said Kathleen Wall, a Colonial Foodways Culinarian at Plimoth Plantation.

The harvest feast lasted for three days. What did they eat? Venison, of course, and Wall said, “Not just a lovely roasted joint of venison, but all the parts of the deer were on the table in who knows how many sorts of ways.” Was there turkey? “Fowl” is mentioned in Winslow’s account, which puts turkey on Wall’s list of possibilities. She also said there probably would have been a variety of seafood and water fowl along with maize bread, pumpkin and other squashes. “It was nothing at all like a modern Thanksgiving,” she said.

While today Thanksgiving is one of our nation’s favorite holidays, it has a far different meaning for many Wampanoag, who now number between 4,000 and 5,000. Turner said, “For the most part, Thanksgiving itself is a day of mourning for Native people, not just Wampanoag people.”

At noon on every Thanksgiving Day, hundreds of Native people from around the country gather at Cole’s Hill, which overlooks Plymouth Rock, for the National Day of Mourning. It is an annual tradition started in 1970, when Wampanoag Wamsutta (Frank) James was invited by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to give a speech at an event celebrating the 350th anniversary of the Pilgrims’ arrival and then disinvited after the event organizers discovered his speech was one of outrage over the “atrocities” and “broken promises” his people endured.

On the Wampanoag welcoming and having friendly relations with the Pilgrims, James wrote in his undelivered speech: “This action by Massasoit was perhaps our biggest mistake. We, the Wampanoag, welcomed you, the white man, with open arms, little knowing that it was the beginning of the end.”

[capstagethanksgiving]

Primary source tales of the first Thanksgiving

There are two primary source documents that give us a clear view of the fundamental differences in colonial and Wampanoag perspectives on the events that we know as “the first Thanksgiving”. 

A journal entry from 1650 by Massachusetts governor, William Bradford, contains his account of the 1621 treaty signed by the Puritans that had arrived on the Mayflower and the Wampanoag people:

All this while the Indians came skulking about them, and would sometimes show themselves aloof off, but when any approached near them, they would run away; and once they stole away their tools where they had been at work and were gone to dinner. But about the 16th of March, a certain Indian came boldly amongst them and spoke to them in broken English, which they could well understand but marveled at it. At length they understood by discourse with him, that he was not of these parts, but belonged to the eastern parts where some English ships came to fish, with whom he was acquainted and could name sundry of them by their names, amongst whom he had got his language. He became profitable to them in acquainting them with many things concerning the state of the country in the east parts where he lived, which was afterwards profitable unto them; as also of the people here, of their names, number and strength, of their situation and distance from this place, and who was chief amongst them. His name was Samoset. He told them also of another Indian whose name was Sguanto, a native of this place, who had been in England and could speak better English than himself.

Being after some time of entertainment and gifts dismissed, a while after he came again, and five more with him, and they brought again all the tools that were stolen away before, and made way for the coming of their great Sachem, called Massasoit. Who, about four or five days after, came with the chief of his friends and other attendance, with the aforesaid Squanto. With whom, after friendly entertainment and some gifts given him, they made a peace with him (which hath now continued this 24 years) in these terms:

That neither he nor any of his should injure or do hurt to any of their people.

That if any of his did hurt to any of theirs, he should send the offender, that they might punish him.

That if anything were taken away from any of theirs, he should cause it to be restored; and they should do the like to his.

If any did unjustly war against him, they would aid him; if any did war against them, he should aid them.

He should send to his neighbors confederates to certify them of this, that they might not wrong them, but might be likewise comprised in the conditions of peace.

That when their men came to them, they should leave their bows and arrows behind them.

After these thing he returned to his place called Sowams, some 40 miles from this place, but Squanto continued with them and was their interpreter and was a special instrument sent of God for their good beyond their expectation. He directed them how to set their corn, where to take fish, and to procure other commodities, and was also their pilot to bring them to unknown places for their profit, and never left them till he died. He was a native of this place, and scarce any left alive besides himself. He we carried away with divers others by one Hunt, a master of a ship, who thought to sell them for slaves in Spain. But he got away for England and was entertained by a merchant in London, and employed to Newfoundland and other parts, and lastly brought hither into these parts by one Mr. Dermer, a gentleman employed by Sir Ferdinando Gorges and others for discovery and other designs in these parts.

In 1675, Wampanoag leader Metacom, son of Massasoit, detailed the Wampanoags’ grievances against the British colonists when meeting with British representatives in Rhode Island, showing a very different perspective than Bradford’s feel-good, paternalistic account of the treaty and British-Wampanoag relations since:

They [Metacom] said they had been the first in doing good to the English, and the English the first in doing wrong; they said when the English first came, their king’s father [Massasoit] was as a great man and the English as a little child. He constrained other Indians from wronging the English and gave them corn and showed them how to plant and was free to do them any good and had let them have a 100 times more land than now the king had for his own people. But their king’s brother, when he was king, came miserably to die by being forced into court and, as they [the Indians] judged, poisoned. 

And another grievance was if 20 of their honest Indians testified that a Englishman had done them wrong, it was as nothing; and if but one of their worst Indians testified against any Indian or their king when it pleased the English, that was sufficient. 

Another grievance was when their kings sold land the English would say it was more than they agreed to and a writing must be proof against all them, and some of their [Indian] kings had done wrong to sell so much that he left his people none, and some being given to drunkenness, the English made them drunk and then cheated them in bargains, but now their kings were forewarned not to part with land for nothing in comparison to the value thereof. Now whomever the English had once owned for king or queen, they would later disinherit, and make another king that would give or sell them their land, that now they had no hopes left to keep any land. 

Another grievance was that the English cattle and horses still increased so that when they removed [the animals wandered] 30 miles from where the English had anything to do [owned land], they [Indians] could not keep their corn from being spoiled, they never being used to fence, and thought that when the English bought land of them they would have kept their cattle upon their own land. 

Another grievance was that the English were so eager to sell the Indians liquors that most of the Indians spent all in drunkenness and then ravened upon the sober Indians and, they did believe, often did hurt the English cattle, and their kings could not prevent it.

[capstagethanksgiving]

This New York Times article links to four different pieces from Indigenous authors. If you want to go straight to the full piece by each author, the ones that are still available are:

Sherman Alexie (nb: I spent a long time considering how much, if anything, to say about the news of sexual abuse allegations against Sherman Alexie, or whether to even include a link to his piece in light of that. In the end, obviously I decided kept this link here, because he is and has been a very prominent Indigenous voice in the arts, but also didn’t want to ignore his unacceptable behavior)

How do you talk to your kids about the Thanksgiving story?

You just tell them the truth, the long historical nature of it.  They’re quite aware of what happened to us, the genocide and the way in which we survive and the way in which my wife and I have survived our individual Indian autobiographies.  I guess it’s trash talking, “Look, you tried to kill us all and you couldn’t.”  We’re still here, waving the turkey leg in the face of evil.

Jacqueline Keeler

I see, in the "First Thanksgiving" story, a hidden Pilgrim heart. The story of that heart is the real tale than needs to be told. What did it hold? Bigotry, hatred, greed, self-righteousness? We have seen the evil that it caused in the 350 years since. Genocide, environmental devastation, poverty, world wars, racism.

Where is the hero who will destroy that heart of evil? I believe it must be each of us. Indeed, when I give thanks this Thursday and I cook my native food, I will be thinking of this hidden heart and how my ancestors survived the evil it caused.

Simon Moya-Smith

If we're going to choose a day for Native American Heritage Day when school is out, then how about Thanksgiving Day itself? Why not? That way we could learn about the real history of the holiday, and not the romanticized version we all hear about.

Or maybe that discussion is too real, too much of a downer for people to stomach on Thanksgiving.

I mean, I get it -- I'm sure it's tough to hear that the first Thanksgiving in Connecticut was in celebration of the subduing of Native Americans or that the pilgrims decapitated the son of the guest and sent his head to Plymouth to be displayed on a pike just outside the colony's entrance, where it would stay rotting for two decades.

Too gruesome? Maybe that's a good thing. Facts are facts, and rejecting them bodes ill for everyone.

So, this Native American Heritage Month, tell a family member or friend that Native Americans sing, they don't chant. Let them know that the pilgrims were themselves illegal immigrants who documented themselves. Talk a bit about how Wilma Mankiller was a warrior and dedicated environmentalist. And remind someone that Native Americans have contributed to this country since the first white man stepped off the boat and refused to learn our languages.

[capstagethanksgiving]

This is a great online exhibit of winter counts, which are made by the Lakota people: pictorial representations of events over time (one picture/event for each year) that affect the tribe.

The Smithsonian doesn’t host this exhibit on its webpage any more, so this is available as archived pages only, through the Internet Archive. Click on the “View HTML version” link to be able to access most of the exhibit content, which includes pictures of winter counts and some background information about the Lakota people and what winter counts are.

[capstagethanksgiving]

This very week(!) HowlRound is publishing a series of conversations with artists on the subject of decolonizing theatre. The link above will take you to the listing of articles in the series, so it will update each day as a new piece is posted.

The first post of the week, Decolonizing Theatre: an Introduction, introduces the theme and explains its goal “ to increase basic understanding of how colonialism (still!) functions on these lands and across the globe. This series aims to create room for dialogue about how the “American” theatre has been and still is complicit in these systems, and also how it might be a space for needed healing.” It also shares definitions of different kinds/phases of colonization and decolonization, and a wonderful series of questions to help guide your thinking about this subject.

The second post, Decolonizing Creation Processes by Reclaiming Narratives, is a conversation with Mary Kathryn Nagle and Robert Goodwin in which they talk about storytellers’ roles in maintaining colonial narratives and the importance of analysis and specificity in telling stories that can disrupt colonialism.

[capstagethanksgiving]

An introduction to Native voices in theatre

Mary Kathryn Nagle’s (author of Manahatta) piece introducing HowlRound’s #InsteadofRedface series is fairly long, but a poignant story of her own experience seeing Indigenous voices and perspectives being kept out of the majority culture in our country. She also writes an insightful list of the “Top 5  Myths that Perpetuate the Performance of Redface and Silence of Native Voices”:

1. Native People do not make up a significant portion of the individuals who come to my theatre; they aren’t a noticeable part of my audience. As a result, if I produce a play by a Native playwright, I won’t sell any tickets. It’s an issue of economics.

Yes, it is true that as a result of the genocide, American Indians now make up less than 1 percent of the population in the United States, and as you can imagine, this means we do not comprise the majority of ticket sales in American theatres. However, the faulty premise here is not an erroneous mathematical calculation, but rather, it is the idea that non-native people have no interest in stories by and about Native People. This is simply not true. First, there is no empirical evidence to support such a conclusion. If you’ve never produced a play by a Native artist, how can you conclude your audience won’t like it?  Second, my experience with my own work has been that non-natives appreciate the opportunity to see and experience authentic Native stories. When we presented Manahatta as a workshop production at the Public this past May, we sold out every night. The majority of these ticket sales were to non-Natives, giving rise to a reality that Myth No. 1 is based not on truth, but like redface, finds its roots in prejudicial beliefs.

2. Unfortunately, we just have more pressing social issues in the United States today that command our attention and focus, and my theatre can’t afford to spend time dwelling on something that happened two hundred years ago in the past.

Ranking social issues by a scale of importance that puts anything deemed “historical” in an irrelevant bucket dooms us to repeat the tragedies of our past. Indeed, many of the pressing social issues of today are an unfortunate consequence of our refusal to honestly face our collective past. Take for instance, the 2008 housing crisis, when millions of Americans lost their homes. This was no accident. This event began in 1654 when the Dutch built the wall on “Wall Street” to remove the Lenape Indians from their home and culminated in 2008 when the banks on Wall Street used similar “business” tactics to remove millions of Americans from their homes.

And if you think the genocide against our people is an event of the past, you’re wrong. In 1978, the Supreme Court relied on its earlier conclusion in Johnson v. McIntosh (the 1823 decision declaring us to be “heathens and savages”) to conclude that Indian Nations could no longer exercise jurisdiction over non-Natives who commit crimes on tribal lands (Oliphant v. Suquamish Indian Tribe).  Following this decision, rates of violence against Native women skyrocketed.  Today, Native women are more likely to be murdered than any other race in America. The majority of the perpetrators of violent crimes against Native women are non-Native men. However, as a result of Oliphant, our tribal governments have been stripped of their jurisdiction to prosecute the men who harm our Native women. (You can learn more here.)

The genocide against our people will never be a “thing of the past” as long as we live in a society unwilling to talk about it.

3. I am unfamiliar with Native culture and identity. It is not something we learn about in schools or in society at large, and so I am scared that my ignorance will lead me to make mistakes should I chose to produce a Native play.

You will. I make mistakes every day. But that’s not the point. The majority of our culture was taken from us. The practice of our culture was made illegal and for many generations, the only images of our identity we were allowed to acknowledge were non-native generated performances of redface. So even for a Native producing Native art, I have to listen. I have to ask questions of my Elders and those who have more knowledge than me simply because it was taken from us, and we are still working to recover it. And that’s the true gift of working with Native artists. Native stories will give you something powerful, something healing—if you listen.

4. It’s OK when we perform redface. When my theatre company puts redface on our stage, we do it with the knowledge that what happened to Native People in this country is wrong; indeed, our performance of redface constitutes an artistic critique of the racial stereotypes that allowed the genocide to happen.

Anyone who thinks their performance of redface is radical, witty, or somehow inviting of an audience to think critically about the perpetuation of the colonial framework that allowed genocide to occur in this country is wrong. Redface has been performed on the American stage since the early nineteenth century—and despite 200 years of non-natives putting on face paint, feathers, and other fake accouterments and “playing Indian”—we still live in the same legal regime that redface was created to serve. Today, the Supreme Court still considers Indians to be “racially inferior” “savages.” I suggest that after 200 years, it’s time to try an alternative. The alternative I suggest we consider is simple: put authentic Native voices on the American stage.

5. I would love to produce a Native playwright or collaborate with a Native artist, but I have no idea where to find them?

Ask me. Please, email me. I will be more than happy to recommend a long list of talented Native artists with whom you should collaborate. Or reach out to Randy Reinholz at Native Voices at the Autry; he and his wife Jean Bruce Scott have worked with more Native artists than anyone in the country. Or Diane Fraher at AMERINDA in New York. Her organization has worked with Native artists in New York for twenty-five years. Or Rhiana Yazzie in Minneapolis. Point is:

We are still here.

[capstagethanksgiving]

Do White Playwrights Think About This?

In this HowlRound piece during their #InsteadofRedface week, Larissa talks about her experience feeling caught between serving a story and representing her community as a playwright, and the unfairness that is present in the fact that she even has these things to consider: 

I can’t un-Native American a character. Do you know how many LORT contracts were available to Native American specific actors last year? I’m pretty sure it was two and I know who got both of them. (There may have been some lingering productions of August: Osage County, but you get the point.) I can’t waste this chance to give Native actors jobs and to represent my people. This country has spent hundreds of years trying to erase us and the genocide continues to this day. If I don’t write about the Native American experience, am I complicit? Being a Native American female playwright doesn’t feel like enough for one play.

I freak out for a few days until I’ve gone in enough circles that I can see myself from outside myself and finally ask, do white playwrights ever think about this? Do they worry about losing jobs for white actors? Do they question if they are writing about enough white issues? Are they expected to be the voice of all white people even when they are just speaking for themselves? Do they fear their play about a girl who wants to be a ballet dancer is responsible for the genocide of their race?

I see clearly the weird mix of hubris and humility I am living in. Can one play be that important? Should one play be that important? Is my one play really that important? It doesn’t mean we won’t cast a Native American actress; or she could be African American or Asian or Hispanic or white or a mix of colors that would look the most like me.

[capstagethanksgiving]

You can tell any story, but if you choose to write about a specific Native American culture, take the time to represent them accurately.  The United States has a very long literary and cultural history of misrepresentations of Native people.  (I suspect the following applies to any culture not your own, but I only have first hand experience with Native cultures.) Doing this will mean extra time and work.  I do not mean reading a bunch of articles or books by non-members of that tribe.  Then you are simply repeating information from another outsider’s point of view, information coming through a cultural filter that has nothing to do with the people you want to write about.  You have to actually contact the specific tribe.  You laugh at how obvious this is, but trust me, it is rarely done.  Or is lamely attempted, with scant consideration for cultural differences that require adjusting your approach and timeline.  Even though Native American tribes are sovereign nations with separate languages and cultures that are very different from the mainstream and each other.  This is why you want to write about them, so be patient and do your work.

Larissa shares her thoughts on how non-Indigenous writers should approach writing about Indigenous stories in this TCG blog post