"Imagination plays too important a role in the writing of history, and
what is imagination but the projection of the author's personality." (Pieter Geyl) This sad realization is all too true. If there were scribes (lacking in both ignorance and partiality) sitting in on every soon-to-be historical event recording it without bias, history would not be the way it is today. "The quill-crazy New Englanders left behind libraries full of statements of purpose in the form of letters, sermons, court transcripts, and diaries. Most of what we know about the history of early New England is lifted straight out of Winthrop's wonderful journal and William Bradford's also wonderful Of Plymouth Plantation." (Vowell, pg.13) But what if the Pequot were as "quill-crazy" as those that burnt them alive? What if they could write their stories, so when we looked back all we found were their diaries and letters? History is "a continuous, systematic narrative of past events", and who writes that but the author? In the case of the Pequot War, the authors were Puritans. Mason "praises the lord for 'burning them up in the fire of his wrath, and dunging the ground with their flesh: It is the Lord's doings, and it is marvelous in our eyes!'" (Vowell, pg.194
The Puritans have been known to relate every event - regardless of its importance - to religion. If something good happened it was said that you were being rewarded, however if something bad happened it would be declared a punishment from god. "For a woman, it can't get any worse than bearing a still-born child, right? Oh, but it can, especially for a woman living in the Massachusetts Bay Colony" because a "still born child is to be seen as God's punishment of the parents. A stillborn 'monster' was obviously an even harsher divine judgement." (Vowell, pg.232) In this passage Vowell explains the Puritan's religious connections tied to everything. Mary Dyer had to secretly bury her still born child as to escape the judgment of others.
This can be seen once again when Roger Williams looses his voice due to a bout of laryngitis. "Thus John Cotton later harangues Williams about his post-showdown laryngitis, 'When you over-heated yourself in reasoning and disputing against the light of [God's] truth, it pleased him to stop your mouth by a sudden disease, and to threaten to take your breath from you.'" (Vowell, pg.140) Cotton explains to Williams that he lost his voice due to his "disputing" against "God's truth". If the history we know was written by those that related laryngitis to religion and praised god for the burning children in the "fire of his wrath", we must question even the details we think to be fact. "To know the truth of history is to realize its ultimate myth and its inevitable ambiguity."
(Roy P. Basler)
Herne, I really liked this post mostly because I really enjoy complaining about the writers of history as well. At one point in the book Sarah equates the Peqout Massacre to Truman deciding to bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This made me think about how little I've been taught about the only nuclear attack in the history of the world. It seems strange that I don't know how many died. That I've seen few pictures of the aftermath. That I couldn't even locate the cities on a map of Japan. It scares me. It makes me wonder if someday, hundreds of years from now, a high school student will look back on us and question our own sanity.
ReplyDeleteI'm really glad that you pointed out this idea from the book "history is written by the writers." So often we are told that "history is written by the winners." Even though that's still usually true it's an interesting comparison. You really see an event through the writer's experiences and bias. Sarah Vowel explains this when she begins describing Anne Hutchinson. “Her thoughts and deeds have been passed down to us solely through the writings of white men who pretty much hate her guts." I think that this means that you need to be careful and understand the writer. You should even be considering the author’s bias when reading a book like “The Wordy Shipmates.”
ReplyDeleteHenre,
ReplyDeleteInteresting exploration of the power imbalance between societies that record events through writing and societies that are based on oral traditions. Literate societies have an inherent bias against the accuracy of oral history. Here is an interesting tidbit: when Prince Charles visited the Iroquois in Canada recently, they gave him an account of the obligations that the British crown entered into back in the days of George III which the Iroquois consider to be binding to this day. Their "record": a wampum belt from an 18th century treaty, which elders can still read and recount the events of the treaty