On May 18, 2007, at 12:47 PM, Anita Wills wrote:

> (snip).... I don't believe anyone would try to step in the shoes of  
> Jewish people, and try to explain away the holocaust.
> Yet, it seems to be acceptable to do exactly that when it comes to  
> Natives and blacks in America.
I don't think that is the case. Anyone with a hint of intelligence  
will not be denying what happened. We argue about issues within both,  
but not the bigger picture of either. The lack of a substantive body  
of historical material written by either group kind of limits things  
to later materials in the WPA format with the problems previously  
discussed. Sure, there are misguided souls who will argue in the face  
of overwhelming evidence that the holocaust never happened, that  
Native American culture didn't take a massive hit and/or didn't bring  
it on themselves, and that African-Americans were a happy lot working  
on the plantations with their basic needs provided. But, you have to  
compare their numbers now to what they were 50 years ago to see how  
perceptions change due to increasing amounts of scholarship nuking  
the old stereotypical arguments. One must also keep up one's guard in  
any event lest it be forgotten and repeated.
>
> The only people who can describe what happened and its' impact are  
> the ones who were affected by the events.
Now that is just so wrong. No-one owns history. The folks who went  
through the holocaust are in general in their 80's and within  
probably 20 years all will be gone. It is probably correct to say  
that they have a definite stake in their history due to their  
immediacy. After they're gone, holocaust publications will  
necessarily be written by folks who weren't directly affected.  
Sometimes distance provides objectivity.

But, there are no African-American former slaves living and no Native  
Americans living who were transported. The numbers of Native  
Americans, like the holocaust survivors, who went through enforced  
acculturation a la Carlisle, are also getting up in years if not all  
already gone.

Even those folks who endured the idiocy that was Jim Crow are getting  
long in the tooth and will not so much longer be amongst us.

After that, scholars and researchers will beaver away and produce  
their works, and that work will be based upon their interests and  
what the historical record has for them to interpret.

Ned Heite and I were bemoaning the fact that most archaeologists come  
from an urban or suburban background and are out there interpreting  
rural farms without any direct experience with and/or knowledge of  
them. While not at the same level as folks finding a collection of  
milk bottles and interpreting it as a cow's nest, the lack of  
experience inevitably means something will be lost because it is not  
perceived as meaningful. On the other hand, due to their diverse  
backgrounds and interests, people will look at farms from economic  
viewpoints and from other viewpoints that provide insight beyond the  
straight experiential views.

 From a personal perspective, I was an (American) site supervisor on  
a Viking (Scandanavian) site off the north coast of (Gaelic/British)  
Scotland. After generations of European folks digging Viking sites,  
it was my meagre contribution to tease out the chronological sequence  
of building types for the first time. Contributions to history are  
not the sole province of those who lived it.

Lyle Browning, RPA