Video
Changing Views: The Whitman Story Over Time
Transcript
[MUSIC PLAYING]
The story of Marcus and Narcissa Whitman. Their intentions, their work among the Cayuse Indians, their deaths, and their lasting impact has been questioned by every generation. At the time that they are killed, they are looked upon pretty much as people who sacrificed themselves for a good cause, trying to uplift the Indians, yet the Indians killed them. And so there was great animosity towards the Indians. That's one of the first reactions. The killing of the Whitman's comes as a pinnacle act and an act that was not in violation of law according to our customs in our country. And they were in our country, but did not want to live according to our customs. I think the fact that there was a spectacular ending to their story made it very easy to cast them into this role as heroic Christian martyrs. I think that happens frequently with people who reach a tragic end. Much as is made of them, and their flaws are forgotten. It made heroines and heroes of people who had had a destructive impact on Native life. Within a generation, though, of the death of the Whitman's, they're looking for another larger reason. One of the stories that got told about the Whitman is that Marcus Whitman saved Oregon. The story is based on a trip Whitman made back East in 1842 to meet with the American Board of Commissioners of foreign missions. Conflicts between the Oregon missionaries had prompted the board to threaten to close two of their mission sites. When he really went back East was primarily to save the mission. In the 1890s, the journey East is reimagined by a Chicago writer named Oliver Nixon. He wrote a book about how Marcus Whitman met with the President and the Secretary of State during this visit. And convinced them not to give the Oregon Country to Britain. The story was really invented from whole cloth. And that goes on for years, whether he did or did not save Oregon. Afterwards, they came up with another meaning for the death of the Whitman's. And it centered around the Whitman's as agents of empire. The idea is that the Whitman's helped the Oregon Trail along. The Whitman's helped with the settlement of the West. And that's their true significance. Whitman Mission was established at a time when this was the dominant belief, that the Whitman's were important as agents of empire. That's why the park is put together the way it is, with the wagon, with the mill pond, with those other elements of settlement and civilization being the things that they created, rather than an Indian village, which would have been there as well. Over the years, the Whitman's legacy would tarnish. Subsequent generations reject them outright. Some even saying they had it coming. And so I think there's some things left out. No one wrote the history for us is kind of what I'm saying. There has to be some truth to both sides. And it's been reported in history books always by the non-Native sides. Today, the story is often viewed as a clash of cultures. But even that may be too simplistic or too one-sided. I don't believe it's a culture clash. I believe that the creator gave us this land and that someone arrived later to tell us that God had told them what to do with not only the land, but with us is the root of the conflict. And it has to do with land and God, as most wars do. Visitors to the mission often struggle with conflicted feelings about the Whitman's. How do we reconcile their tragic deaths with what many view now as the wrongness of their intentions? I think I understand the sincerity of both Marcus and Narcissa desire to transform the future of these people, but to be sympathetic to people who were really interested in destroying Native culture, and replacing Native culture with American culture, and who were contemptuous of Native people. On the other hand, you have to ask yourself, would I have done any better had I been living at the time? We're all prisoners of our own value system. It's very hard to step outside that system. I don't think we can demonize the Whitman's for being human, for their individual character or nature. Historians argue among themselves about how you judge the past. Do we judge the Whitman's by their own standards? They have their flaws, but they're certainly trying to do the right thing. Do we judge them by 20th century standards, and condemn them for their cultural insensitivity, and so on? I think we have to dip into each of these wells and look at them from each of these ways. But in the end, it's not for us to judge the Whitman's. They're gone. It's for us to explain them and try to understand what happened. [MUSIC PLAYING]
Description
This is a short video about the story of the Whitmans and their mission and how the story has changed over time.
Duration
5 minutes, 42 seconds
Credit
NPS Video
Date Created
02/11/2023
Copyright and Usage Info