In personal experience family myths fall into one of several categories: 1. The attempt to insert ones own life into the family history in a twisted or invented narrative. 2. To obfuscate or hide a family scandal 3. To perpetuate a grievance, usually concerning stolen land, lost inheritance, etc.
That tracks - in this case, I would put our family myth into the “perpetuate a grievance” category. And the point in perpetuating our “grievance” is to justify the uncomfortable facts of our displacement of the inhabitants of the Ohio River Valley.
Which, in case I wasn’t clear, I don’t think can be justified. Eight generations later, I’m not sure what I can do besides set the record straight, and I’m struggling to accomplish even that!
What insight to have gained from understanding the necessity of this family myth to serve as justification for what we now recognize to be unjustifiable. Deep.
It is a balancing act between "thinking outside the box" to interpret received wisdom and "taking their word for it" when ancestors leave their thoughts behind in writing.
Obviously, Americans feel very strongly about their founding myths, and rarely know enough to make an educated judgment about their ancestors' actual role in history. I'm no different, so I appreciate everyone willing to explore the alternatives with me.
I honor your honesty and intent to find that balance. Family origin myths seem to be the stories we want to tell ourselves about ourselves. Corroborating their accounts with evidence is only the first step to understanding their role in history.
The history of violence in N. America during the colonial period is far more complex than either mythologized nationalism or the current Neo-Marxist post colonial viewpoint. Neither hit the mark and do a great disservice to both aboriginal populations and European colonists. A reading of "The Ohio Frontier" by Douglas Hurt is illuminating as it describes in detail every major atrocity in early Ohio. It is heartbreaking to read and one comes away feeling that about five percent of both Indians and Europeans were murderous psychopaths. This was made far worse by the British proxy war against the American colonists. One thousand five hundred men, women and children in Kentucky were murdered in the most brutal way because the British paid for the Indians to do so.
It’s a three part series by Indiana University. There is a separate book on Illinois, Indiana and Ohio. The Ohio and Illinois books are well done and have amazing bibliographies. Indiana was a mild disappointment. I consider these three books required reading for anyone doing historical research in the Old Northwest.
In personal experience family myths fall into one of several categories: 1. The attempt to insert ones own life into the family history in a twisted or invented narrative. 2. To obfuscate or hide a family scandal 3. To perpetuate a grievance, usually concerning stolen land, lost inheritance, etc.
That tracks - in this case, I would put our family myth into the “perpetuate a grievance” category. And the point in perpetuating our “grievance” is to justify the uncomfortable facts of our displacement of the inhabitants of the Ohio River Valley.
Which, in case I wasn’t clear, I don’t think can be justified. Eight generations later, I’m not sure what I can do besides set the record straight, and I’m struggling to accomplish even that!
What insight to have gained from understanding the necessity of this family myth to serve as justification for what we now recognize to be unjustifiable. Deep.
It is a balancing act between "thinking outside the box" to interpret received wisdom and "taking their word for it" when ancestors leave their thoughts behind in writing.
Obviously, Americans feel very strongly about their founding myths, and rarely know enough to make an educated judgment about their ancestors' actual role in history. I'm no different, so I appreciate everyone willing to explore the alternatives with me.
I honor your honesty and intent to find that balance. Family origin myths seem to be the stories we want to tell ourselves about ourselves. Corroborating their accounts with evidence is only the first step to understanding their role in history.
The history of violence in N. America during the colonial period is far more complex than either mythologized nationalism or the current Neo-Marxist post colonial viewpoint. Neither hit the mark and do a great disservice to both aboriginal populations and European colonists. A reading of "The Ohio Frontier" by Douglas Hurt is illuminating as it describes in detail every major atrocity in early Ohio. It is heartbreaking to read and one comes away feeling that about five percent of both Indians and Europeans were murderous psychopaths. This was made far worse by the British proxy war against the American colonists. One thousand five hundred men, women and children in Kentucky were murdered in the most brutal way because the British paid for the Indians to do so.
...and following on what I was saying to Jill: I especially appreciate it when those who do know more than me share resources.
I'll be looking for that Douglas Hurt book for a little light summer reading!
It’s a three part series by Indiana University. There is a separate book on Illinois, Indiana and Ohio. The Ohio and Illinois books are well done and have amazing bibliographies. Indiana was a mild disappointment. I consider these three books required reading for anyone doing historical research in the Old Northwest.
Amazing how a tiny minority can ruin things for everyone.