Historical Revisions
 

Historical Revisions (pulled from FoxNews)

The historical society in a Massachusetts town is so worried about language on historical markers being offensive to modern sensibilities that it has taken to placing covers on them, reports the Boston Globe.

The markers in Deerfield, Mass., mark spots where, in 1704, French and Indian forces attacked settlers. Some contain references to ''savages" and ''Negro servants" that are now considered offensive.

Where one marble tablet originally read: ''Mary, adopted by an Indian, was named Walahowey. She married a savage, and became one," it now reads, ''She married a Kanien'kehaka and adopted the culture, customs and language of her new community in Kahnawake."

One couple said they were incensed by the changes.

Rose and James Matthews wrote in a letter to the historical society: ''We condemn your attempt to create a warm and fuzzy feeling for our Colonial history because of political correctness or personal attitudes. What will you do next? ... [claim] the hatchet marks were actually tooth marks made by tall mice seeking shelter from the cold?"

A lot of things in history are rough and hard to look at/read about but that is what history is supposedly about. I would hate to think that we are so shallow that we cant put things in context and so tender-hearted that we can?t handle the emotions of our forbearers. For those who want to get a feel for what was going on at the time, perhaps a pamphlet with a short story would be interesting and a way to share a contemporary perspective. Sure, make it for sale for some nominal fee like a buck and use the proceeds to keep up the artifact. For those who could possibly be offended, may I suggest a tic-toc and a shipping crate full of soft and pink cotton that they can hide in and just let the world continue on.

Cuts both ways though. I have two books that are written about Gen. Custer and the Battle of the Little Big Horn. The contemporary version is a work of scholarly historical/scientific research while the 1898 version is all emotion, anger at the Native Americans and tons of Ra-Ra Pro-Custer political spin. I wouldn?t part with either as in combination they that tell the story as it should be told, not as some now or then political spin doc wants to tell it.

Scamp

Read below. 'Nuff said.

I have a book at home written by an explorer of the Pacific Northwest. The story is of the author's trip from Puget Sound to what is now Eastern Washington, down to the Columbia River and out to the Pacific where he caught a ship home to New England.

The most interesting part of the book is his description of the Indian guide that left him in what is now the town of Selah.

The reason that this is the most interesting is that later there was a historian that recorded stories of American Indians who interviewed the Indian in the explorer's book.

The Indian said that he left the man alone in the desert of Eastern Washington because he was tired of being treated like a dog. :re:

My view on learning history is find the information written closest to when things happen and find both sides of the story if available.

This is the line that really caught my attention with this story..."The historical society in a Massachusetts town is so worried about language on historical markers being offensive"

The very people charged with the protection of the integrity of our history are the ones wanting to pacify the adult-babies of the world. This is also the reason I couldn't finish the tour of Hiroshima. Instead of simply stating the facts (after all to me that is what historical documentation is...facts not personal conjecture) they jab at the evil American Empire who "murdered" the poor innocent school children by dropping that horrific bomb on them.

I want the truth of what happened to be told. People fight wars, battles and skirmishes. People die, are maimed, and left without families and homes. These things happen.

Are we going to gloss over the handling of the African slaves because some people take offense at the description of the slave traders? Do you really think that anyone wants that era to have a more rosey look to it?

Gee, a leader and lawyer of the NAACP, who happens to be of African decent, recently referred to an Irish town councilman (or some other politician type person) as a leprechaun and has REFUSED to appologize. She claims it was a .......are you ready for this....no I'm not buying it either......."Halloween reference"

Since when are leprechauns associated with halloween? Hello, try again, its St. Patrick's Day, oh but then it would be quantified as a derogatory statement against one's heritage. Had that moment been twisted around the other way she would have screamed until he resigned. I am in no way advocating prejudice of any kind, but you can't the accepted moral structure only one sided. I seem to recall in one of those great historical documents, the words..."for the good of all mankind."

Sorry, I'm on a rant and just so annoyed with the Stupid-ization movement that is sweeping this country!

I agree with a lot of what you say here except to add one important thing: Its ALL somebody's spin on the situation, every word of "history."
Its all just what you choose to believe as: "truth"
Theres currently a brouhaha in El Cerrito because a mural has a figure in it, that was ostensibly a (indian)slave owning white man. Then it turned out he was hispanic (Victor Castro, an important early settler and Californio) Now there's a big argument over whether a a Hispanic is "white" (some are!!) Being a -person of color my ownself (sort of a pinkish beige--what used to be called "flesh"--darker in summers) I can relate
Victor Castro was a well respected figure here for a long time, theres a lot named after him and his family, Castroville for instance.

James

I don?t know about ?truth? James. In my opinion, the best we can do is try to understand the historic situation, interject our learning and knowledge and then take a SWAG at reality. Short of that, we accept someone else?s SWAG as probable, feasible or digestible and get on down the road. Most often a SWAG has tons of spin content so we need to take that into account in evaluating conclusions. In the finial analysis we should all trust our own eyes, ears and judgment and take a long hard look at everything else if it really matters to us individually. Maybe we are saying the same thing, it's just that I find the concept of "truth" to be highly maluable in most all sets of hands.

Interesting argument in El Centro. Alas, does it really matter if Castro was ethnically a once, twice or thrice removed Caucasian Spaniard? The guy did what he did, good and questionable alike, so what. Is it the supposition that the Hispanic linage doesn?t include former slave owners? Hmmm, that?s not probable at all and not necessarily historically accurate, but oh well; I got no vested interest in that argument at all so will go with the flow and make no waves.

Scamp

I had a history teacher once tell us that "History is written by the winners". He may have been quoting someone but I didnt pay that close attention to his class. He made the industrial revolution and the early 20th century a total bore!

It's only since I grew up that I started to pay attention and really learn about that era in civilization (not the video game). :D

DL.....
 

I?d say that your HS teach was half right, but it?s situational as both supposed winners and losers write history as you know. It?s all a matter of what is considered PC or equivalent that becomes widely circulated, taught and ?blessed? that becomes predominate.
As an example, Japan has their own historic version of WWII and it is not the same as our version, not at all. The recent movie ?Pearl Harbor? was a smash hit in Japan but was new news to a huge segment of Japanese youth. However, the Japanese distributed version was well edited down from the other marketed versions and as it turned out the real draw was ?Ben?. He was then the heartthrob of Japanese Lasses so that was the probable marketing motive and the core reason for strong Japanese editing intervention.

Serious and credible US research scholars of today rue the day that their counterparts in history didn?t pay more attention to our Native Americans as we collectively lost half the story and more or less made up that which went missing. And that is a damn pity, so sad. So in this particular instance I would side with your HS teach.

Sure, the Industrial Revolution can be boring as all hell if not taught properly. But on the other hand, a good teacher can absolutely captivate an audience with the age of steam and steel and all that went on and all the social/cultural implications. As well, that is a topic a student has to be ready for and that receptiveness can come at almost any age and I know of no law that says it automatically comes at HS age.

Scamp

Remember that in the case of this country that when "we" win we don't always demonize the losers. Often times we make them a focus of our sympathy and pity.

Darrel's great grandmother was a white slave in an Indian tribe. No one wants to believe that especially the college students that were in his speech class.

Joy