Showing posts with label 1620s. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1620s. Show all posts

Saturday, November 27, 2021

"A Rare Example of Cooperation"

"By 1620, Wampanoag weakness had provided an opportunity for a rival group to the west, the Narragansett, who had largely escaped the impact of the disease. When the Plymouth settlers arrived, Ousamequin was struggling to prevent the Narragansett from subjugating the remaining Wampanoags and forcing them to pay tribute. While he initially kept his distance from the Mayflower's inhabitants, fearing further aggression—and disease—Ousamequin evidently came to the conclusion that an alliance with the new English arrivals in the region could help protect his people."

Sarah Pruitt at "History Stories" discusses the backstory of the 1621 Thanksgiving.

Friday, November 27, 2020

"There's Been Little Fanfare and Even Less Debate"

"But as a country, we've become unrecognizable to that first generation of New Englanders, and no longer as invested in mythologizing their world as were Americans 150 years ago. On the contrary, the rigid society the Pilgrims sought to build, based on exclusivity and sameness, and the narrow definition of citizenship that inspired some Americans to excavate their memory more two centuries later, are out of step with the diverse (and often quarrelsome) capitalist democracy we've come to be."

At Politico, Joshua Zeitz explains why the 400th anniversary of the Mayflower's landing in Massachusetts has not drawn great attention.

Thursday, November 28, 2013

"There’s a Tendency to Grab a Hold of Some Historical Incident and Yoke It to a Current Agenda"

"Historians say that the settlers in Plymouth, and their supporters in England, did indeed agree to hold their property in common—William Bradford, the governor, referred to it in his writings as the 'common course.' But the plan was in the interest of realizing a profit sooner, and was only intended for the short term; historians say the Pilgrims were more like shareholders in an early corporation than subjects of socialism."

In a 2010 New York Times article, Kate Zernike discusses competing narratives about the Pilgrims.

Thursday, November 22, 2012

Pilgrims' Progress

"According to the hypothesis, infected ship rats landed in the New World and excreted leptospira, infecting raccoons, mink, and muskrats whose urine further contaminated any standing fresh water. It is unclear why this particular infectious disease should afflict Native Americans and not subsequent European colonists. Prior exposure does not necessarily result in immunity because there are a number of different infectious strains."

Madeleine Johnson in Slate looks into why in New England "as many as nine out of 10 coastal Indians were killed in the epidemic between 1616 and 1619."

Thursday, November 25, 2010