1 Like
âŠmmmaybe. But we only have the white guyâs side of the story so itâs hard to confirm its veracity.
Frankly I think it sounds more than a little suspect since âthe good white Christian who fought nobly enough to win the respect of the red savageâ is a trope/folk legend frequently invoked to justify white occupation of native territories. Just read the following account from the âhistoryâ section of the Whitesboro web page:
He accepted the challenge, took hold of the Indian and by a fortunate trip, succeeded almost instantly in throwing him. As he saw him falling, in order to prevent another challenge, he fell upon the Indian for an instant and it was some moments before he could rise. When the Indian finally rose, he shrugged his shoulders and was said to have muttered âUGHâ, you good fellow too much". Hugh White became a hero in the eyes of the Oneida Indians. This incident made more manifest the respect of the Indian for White. In all ways, White dealt fairly with the Oneida tribe and gained their confidence, which brought about good-will.
That reads more like a badly written episode of that 1950s Davy Crockett TV series than an unbiased historical account.
6 Likes
yes. Time to deconstruct the myth with the aid of real historians?
3 Likes
It does sound like a bit of a tall tale, doesnât it? Perhaps it was a story old Hugh told to his grandchildren (even if heâd still been alive at the townâs incorporation he would have been about 80 years old), in which case a bit of self-aggrandizement could be expected. I personally doubt it was any kind of momentous victory, but merely a reflection of Hugh Whiteâs having taken part in the usual athleticism of the Oneida menâs community. But thatâs only my conjecture.
As you indicate, we canât confirm any of this, but is it right for us to resort to revisionism based only on our own conjecture? I donât think so. When we read an historical story like that we are always going to interpret it through the filter of our experiences and the prism of our prejudices.
Since we donât know for sure I think we should give deference to the records of the Oneida people themselves, who were never driven from the area and whose descendants are with us today and are as fully integrated members of our community as any other US citizens. According to tribal records there were always good relations between the Oneida and the settlers, and there is apparently no reason to doubt the story that White was (at least unofficially) adopted into the tribe. In any case, I donât think we should be dynamiting the Bamiyan Buddhas of our cultural history because of crusading ideological purity or currently popular political correctness. Thereâs no need to damn the cityâs seal and denounce traditional stories of the villageâs founding based on emotionalistic revisionism.
But thanks for providing a thoughtful response to my post. Thatâs a refreshing change from the typical slash & burn ad hominem attacks one usually receives when posting anything on the Internet related to a political issue, let alone when one is playing devilâs advocate and trying to provide a counterbalance to the emotionalistic frenzy of the moment.
Calling all historians!
2 Likes
Iâm afraid I canât agree that âchanging a town seal which was most recently updated in the late 1970sâ is even remotely comparable to âdemolishing a 2,500-year-old World Heritage site.â
6 Likes
Perfect line from that gallery âThe large murals that line the walls of Pioneer Hall depict some of the most famous and interesting moments in our townâs past, and are well worth checking out as works of artâeven if they are also by any standard horrifying at a level that is difficult to comprehendâ
Another good band name, scrap MouseRat, letâs go with: âHorrifying at a level that is difficult to comprehendâ.
1 Like
Well, of course. Itâs a metaphor. Not at all like those statues in degree, but similar in the impulse to tear down historical symbols that offend oneâs morals or belief system. And perhaps worse because itâs based on a false perception of what those artifacts represent.
No one is asking that we burn all the flags, hunt down and erase all the photographs of it and destroy the designs. Just not fly the thing in the faces of those it would create a climate of sublimated racism for.
The statues were physical, one-of-a-kind icons, the flag not so much.
4 Likes
Actually, in the revolutionary wars, the Onedians were split and after the war, were indeed eventually displaced, in part because the State of New York whittled away their land to about 32 acres from the original promised 6 million from the treaty of Canadiagua⊠There arenât many treaties between various Indian nations and the US government that werenât broken, actually.
[ETA] From the AIM website, a position paper on broken treaties: http://www.aimovement.org/ggc/trailofbrokentreaties.html
The relationship between the American government and Native peoples of North America has historically been built on lies, violence, and at times, outright genocide.
In fact, Wikipedia has a list of treaties between the US government and Native American nations. Iâd suggest you maybe use that as a jumping off point for some education - Iâd expect many of those, most if not all, have been broken when it was decided that the needs of white farmers outweighed the needs of Native Americans:
According to this website, 500 were made, and 500 were broken:
4 Likes
Yay Team Historians!
1 Like
Not even my field!
5 Likes
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
