THE TRUTH ABOUT THE FIRST THANKSGIVING 
by James W. Loewen

[Jim Loewen teaches sociology at the University of Vermont- Burlington, and 
is the author of Lies My Teacher Told Me - Everything Your American History 
Textbook Got Wrong.]

Over the last few years, I have asked hundreds of college students, "When was 
the country we now know as the United States first settled?"

That is a generous way of putting the question. Surely "we now know as" 
implies that the original settlement happened before the United States. I had 
hoped that students would suggest 30,000 BC, or some other pre-Columbian 
date. They did not. Their consensus answer was "1620."

Part of the the problem is the word "settle." "Settlers" were white. Indians 
did not settle. Nor are students the only people misled by "settle." One 
recent Thanksgiving weekend, I listened as a guide at the Statue of Liberty 
told about European immigrants "populating a wild East Coast." As we shall 
see, however, if Indians had not already settled New England, Europeans would 
have had a much tougher job of it.

Starting with the Pilgrims not only leaves out the Indians, but also the 
Spanish. In the summer of 1526 five hundred Spaniards and one hundred black 
slaves founded a town near the mouth of the Pedee River in what is now South 
Carolina. Disease and disputes with nearby Indians caused many deaths. 
Finally, in November the slaves rebelled, killed some of their masters, and 
escaped to the the Indians. By now only 150 Spaniards survived, and they 
evacuated back to Haiti. The ex-slaves remained behind. So the first 
non-Native settlers in "the country we now know as the United States" were 
Africans.

The Spanish continued their settling in 1565, when they massacred a 
settlement of French Protestants at St. Augustine, Florida, and replaced it 
with their own fort. Some Spanish were pilgrims, seeking regions new to them 
to secure religious liberty: these were Spanish Jews, who settled in New 
Mexico in the late 1500s. Few Americans know that one third of the United 
States, from San Francisco to Arkansas to Natchez to Floirda, has been 
Spanish longer than it has been "American." Moreover, Spanish culture left an 
indelible impact on the West. The Spanish introduced horses, cattle, sheep, 
pigs, and the basic elements of cowboy culture, including its vocabulary: 
mustang, bronco, rodeo, lariat, and so on.

Beginnning with 1620 also omits the Dutch, who were living in what is now 
Albany by 1614. Indeed, 1620 is not even the date of the first permanent 
British settlement, for in 1607, the London Company sent settlers to 
Jamestown, Virginia. No matter. The mythic origin of "the country we now know 
as the United States" is at Plymouth Rock, and the year is 1620. My students 
are not at fault. The myth is what their testbooks and their culture have 
offered them. I examined how twelve textbooks used in high school American 
history classes teach Thanksgiving. Here is the version in one high school 
history book, THE AMERICAN TRADITION:

After some exploring, the Pilgrims chose the land around Plymouth Harbor for 
their settlement. Unfortunately, they had arrived in December and were not 
prepared for the New England winter. However, they were aided by freindly 
Indians, who gave them food and showed them how to grow corn. When warm 
weather came, the colonists planted, fished, hunted, and prepared themselves 
for the next winter. After harvesting their first crop, they and their Indian 
friends celebrated the first Thanksgiving.

My students also learned that the Pilgrims were persecuted in England for 
their religion, so they moved to Holland. They sailed on the Mayflower to 
America and wrote the Mayflower Compact. Times were rough, until they met 
Squanto. He taught them how to put fish in each corn hill, so they had a 
bountiful harvest.

But when I ask them about the plague, they stare back at me. "What plague? 
The Black Plague?" No, that was three centuries earlier, I sigh.

"THE WONDERFUL PLAGUE AMONG THE SAVAGES"

The Black Plague does provide a useful introduction, however. Black (or 
bubonic) Plague "was undoubtedly the worst disaster that has ever befallen 
mankind." In three years it killed 30 percent of the population of Europe. 
Catastrophic as it was, the disease itself comprised only part of the horror. 
Thinking the day of judgment was imminent, farmers failed to plant crops. 
Many people gave themselves over to alcohol. Civil and economic disruption 
may have caused as much death as the disease itself.

For a variety of reasons --- their probable migration through cleansing 
Alaskan ice fields, better hygiene, no livestock or livestock-borne microbes 
--- Americans were in Howard Simpson's assessment "a remarkable healthy race" 
before Columbus. Ironically, their very health now proved their undoing, for 
they had built up no resistance, genetically or through childhood diseases, 
to the microbes Europeans and Africans now brought them. In 1617, just before 
the Pilgrims landed, the process started in southern New England. A plague 
struck that made the Black Death pale by comparison.

Today we think it was the bubonic plague, although pox and influenza are also 
candidates. British fishermen had been fishing off Massachusetts for decades 
before the Pilgrims landed. After filling their hulls with cod, they would 
set forth on land to get firewood and fresh water and perhaps capture a few 
Indians to sell into slavery in Europe. On one of these expeditions they 
probably transmitted the illness to the people they met. Whatever it was, 
within three years this plague wiped out between 90 percent and 96 percent of 
the inhabitants of southern New England. The Indian societies lay devastated. 
Only "the twentieth person is scare left alive," wrote British eyewitness 
Robert Cushman, describing a death rate unknown in all previous human 
experience. Unable to cope with so many corpses, survivors fled to the next 
tribe, carrying the infestation with them, so that Indians died who had never 
seen a white person. Simpson tells what the Pilgrims saw:

The summer after the Pilgrims landed, they sent two envoys on a diplomatic 
mission to treat with Massasoit, a famous chief encamped some 40 miles away 
at what is now Warren, Rhode Island. The envoys discovered and described a 
scene of absolutie havoc. Villages lay in ruins because there was no one to 
tend them. The ground was strewn with the skulls and the bones of thousands 
of Indians who had died and none was left to bury them.

During the next fifteen years, additional epidemics, most of which we know to 
have been smallpox, struck repeatedly. Europeans caught smallpox and the 
other maladies, to be sure, but most recovered, including, in a later 
century, the "heavily pockmarked George Washington." Indians usually died. 
Therefore, almost as profound as their effect on Indian demographics was the 
impact of the epidemics on the two cultures, European and Indian. The English 
Separatists, already seeing their lives as part of a divinely inspired 
morality play, inferred that they had God on their side. John Winthrop, 
Governor of Massachusetts Bay Colony, called the plague "miraculous." To a 
friend in England in 1634, he wrote:

But for the natives in these parts, God hath so pursued them, as for 300 
miles space the greatest part of them are swept away by the small pox which 
still continues among them. So as God hath thereby cleared our title to this 
place, those who remain in these parts, being in all not fifty, have put 
themselves under our protect....

Many Indians likewise inferred that their God had abandoned them. Cushman, 
our British eyewitness, reported that "those that are left, have their 
courage much abated, and their countenance is dejected, and they seem as a 
people affrighted." After all, neither they nor the Pilgrims had access to 
the germ theory of disease. Indian healers offered no cure, their religion no 
explanation. That of the whites did. Like the Europeans three centuries 
before them, many Indians surrendered to alcohol or bagan to listen to 
Christianity.

These epidemics constituted perhaps the most important single geopolitical 
event of the first third of the 1600s, anywhere on the planet. They meant 
that the British would face no real Indian challenge for their first fifty 
years in America. Indeed, the plague helped cause the legendary warm 
reception Plymouth enjoyed in its first formative years from the Wampanoags. 
Massasoit needed to ally with the Pilgrims because the plague had so weakened 
his villages that he feared the Narragansetts to the west.

Moreover, the New England plagues exemplify a process which antedated the 
Pilgrims and endures to this day. In 1942, more than 3,000,000 Indians lived 
on the island of Haiti. Forty years later, fewer than 300 remained. The 
earliest Portuguese found that Labrador teemed with hospitable Indians who 
could easily be enslaved. It teems no more. In about 1780, smallpox reduced 
the Mandans of North Dakota from nine villages to two; then in 1837, a second 
smallpox epidemic reduced them from 1600 persons to just 31. The pestilence 
continues; a fourth of the Yanomamos of northern Brazil and souther Venezuela 
died in the year prior to my writing this sentence. Europeans were never 
able to "settle" China, India, Indonesia, Japan, or most of Africa because 
too many people already lived there. Advantages in military and social 
technology would have enabled Europeans to dominate the Americas, as they 
eventually dominated China and Africa, but not to "settle" the New World. For 
that, the plague was required. Thus, except for the European (and African) 
invasion itself, the pestilence was surely the most important event in the 
history of America.

What do we learn of all this in the twelve histories I studied? Three offer 
some treatment of Indian disease as a factor in European colonization. LIFE 
AND LIBERTY does quite a good job.  AMERICA PAST AND PRESENT supplies a fine 
analysis of the general impact of Indian disease in American history, though 
it leaves out the plague at Plymouth. THE AMERICAN WAY is the only text to 
draw the appropriate geopolitical inference about the importance of the 
Plymouth outbreak, but it never discuses Indian plagues anywhere else. 
Unfortunately, the remaining nine books offer almost nothing. Two totally 
omit the subject. Each of the other seven furnishes only a fragment of a 
paragraph that does not even make it into the index, let alone into students' 
minds.

Everyone knew all about the plague in colonial America. Even before the 
Mayflower sailed, King James of England gave thanks to "Almighty God in his 
great goodness and bounty towards us," for sending "this wonderful plague 
among the savages." Today it is no surprise that not one in a hundred of my 
college students has ever heard of the plague. Unless they read LIFE AND 
LIBERTY or PAST AND PRESENT, no student can come away from these books 
thinking of Indians as people who made an impact on North America, who lived 
here in considerable numbers, who settled, in short, and were then killed by 
disease or arms.

(continued...)

Reply via email to