Hello, I myself am a volunteer in the Powhatan village, I also am a Nansemond Indian with mostly Irish and Western European blood, I have blue eyes and blonde hair. My ancestors were a part of the Powhatan confederacy. Jamestown settlement does work with local indigenous tribes including the Pamunkey, Mattaponi, Nansemond, Chickahominy, Rappahannock, and Pattawomek nations. When making statements as you did, you have to remember that Virginia Indians (which is what we prefer to be called) work and live the same as most other people in Virginia. You also have to remember that the Pamunkey and Mattaponi reservations are almost an hour and a half away from James city county. My people come from about 35 miles down the James river from Jamestown and it takes me almost two hours to get to work on country backroads. All of the yehakins are historically accurate and staged as real living spaces. There is not just one yehakin staged for interpretation, we choose where we want to be working that day. Each yehakin has to be smoked out usually once a month, it just so happened that he was smoking out that yehakin on that particular day. Powhatan adults would have been the only ones sleeping on the raised platforms. Children would have slept on mats and hides stacked high on the floor this is why there isn’t much raised bedding. We do not portray specific characters because sadly there is not much known about individual people from paspehegh. We have to have all of our sites in close range to one another because there is just simply not enough suitable space anywhere else in the park. Thank you for your concerns but we have it all figured out
Hi there Ethan! Thank you for your feedback and corrections. I think you may have interpreted our comments about things that were not clearly communicated to visitors on the day we visited Jamestown Settlement as criticisms of the museum itself. I apologise that this was not clear to you. There is a difference between efforts made on the museum's part and what visitors come away from the site feeling they've learned/been told. Our suggestion is that Jamestown Settlement do more to close this gap--for example, by publicising how they recruit volunteers or staff to work in the Powhatan Village. We are aware that there are certain constraints on museums based on decisions made in the past (size of site, for example). The consequences of these choices, none the less, influence modern visitor experience which is our primary interest. Thanks again for your careful watching and for offering your expertise!
Thank you for your comments. I too am mixed race/heritage--although still have what is considered typical NA features, even though my blood is very old ---Cherokee, Mohawk, and Seneca. I was raised in Hampton Roads VA, although my father's family are from Western NC. They migrated to Hampton Roads in the early 20th century for work. I spent many Sunday afternoons listening to the stories from the mountains near Cherokee---even though we had fully "integrated," we missed the old home. One thing my father made sure he did was expose us to NA cultures, and the visits first to the old Powhatan village in Hampton VA, and later to the Jamestown village played a huge and important role in learning. And it meant a lot to my father personally that there were other NA people in the region trying to educate the community. The Nansemond and Pamunkey were a huge part of my education, and I am grateful. Each generation views the history and culture through their own filters. I find some of this video too clinical and judgmental. Just, if not more, important is the need to be able to tell the history and explain the culture of the people. I am sad that someone would be judgmental because of someone's skin, hair or eye color. It is the culture, the stories, the history that is important. I would encourage this video presenter to learn more about NA peoples. And to focus on the Indian Removal Acts----how the government later used censuses to reclassify NA peoples, deny them rights as citizens, and tear families apart. Also learning about the "re-education" schools (one in Hampton VA--Hampton University) that were used to separate people from their culture. Maybe then, the presenter would better understand why not everyone "looks Indian"---and why it is more important to focus on the culture. I am disappointed in this video.
One of my direct ancestors was a shareholder in the Virginia Company. He settled in Jamestown in the early 1620s and was part of the government commission that investigated an Indian uprising shortly before he arrived.
If you wanted a narrative of the site, you could have taken the guided tour, which gives an overview of exactly what you were looking for. The interpreters do give overall narratives if you were to ask, but the reality of interpretation is that it is fluid. It doesn’t look like you took a guided tour. So your criticisms stemming from a lack of narrative seem to stem from that issue. Regarding hiring practices of indigenous people. The Jamestown Yorktown foundation is run my the Virginia department of education and must conform to the state hiring regulations which include non discriminatory practices that every state agency must abide by. JYF has always had a very close relationship with the indigenous tribes of Virginia. The job listings and recruiting have always been openly shared with the Virginia tribal leadership. When positions in the interpretive sites are open, JYF must hire from a pool of applicants. If there are no indigenous people applying, JYF can’t sit and wait and hold positions open because not enough indigenous people are applying. They need to fill these positions. If positions are not filled, the state will remove that position from the JYF budget the next fiscal year. I found your criticisms of Jamestown Settlement to be pretty off base and unfair to the museum because of how you approached the site. Did you go multiple days or did you just go based on a single walk through? How much time did you spend in each interpretive site? Did you reach out to JYF to see what programs are offered to visitors?
Hi David, thank you very much for your thoughts and comments. Many of your concerns relate to a lack of knowledge about my method in visiting these sites-we will do better about explaining this in future videos. Our approach is to visit the site once (as most tourists/students would) to see what the average visitor would be presented on any given day. I believe that museums should be able to provide all guests with a sound history regardless of whether a visitor pays more for a tour or takes a self-guided tour, but I understand not everyone shares this opinion. There are many things at Jamestown Settlement that could be updated to give all visitors a better understanding of the site’s history-that is what I found when I visited. Perhaps we will do a review of 1607: A Nation Takes Root as an example. But I sympathise with the museum’s dual-mandate to teach history and to attract guests. I speak more to this in my video about Historic Jamestowne. I also understand from my own museum experience the struggle to staff museums within the constraints of grants. I think it is still feasible and important to make practices more clear on site. You might view my video on Plimoth Patuxet for examples of how they’ve done this successfully. Thanks again for your interest and feedback, which is always welcome.
The tours are free of charge and the narrative you seek is well explained in the indoor galleries. The “average visitor” tends to get a very superficial understanding of the history. This is not for a lack of effort on the museum, this is the problem of limited time on the visitors’ part. When you distill a complex history into the average museum visitor’s time frame, you have to make difficult positions. What is important home person is not as important to others. The story of the indigenous people is extremely important, but it is only one part of the very important story that Jamestown has to tell as the first permanent English settlement in the new world. I’m not really sure what part of the narrative you think that Jamestown needs to “do a better job” explaining.
Hi David, we were neither invited to take a tour when we visited nor did we see anything about free tours being offered that day, but I agree that this would have improved our experience. I will comment that if a site requires a tour to be understood, guests should be automatically placed on a tour as soon as they leave the theatre with the introductory video. The missing piece is, as I say in the video, a view of what life was actually like at Jamestown or in the Powhatan Confederacy in the period represented. As you say, much of this IS present in the written exhibits-but we would like to see these elements brought outside as many visitors skipped the indoor exhibits. I invite you to view some of my other videos for examples of how other sites have approached this. There is no perfect method, but demonstration-based museums lack a level of coherency present at other sites. Thanks again for the clarification and I appreciate your enthusiasm for local history.
Having also watched your video about Plimoth Patuxet it sounds like you went to Plimoth first and don't like Jamestown because they do things differently. You praise the 3rd person interpretation at the Wampanoag town but criticize the 3rd person interpretation at Jamestown. You are entertained by the 1st person interpretation in Plimoth and seem disappointed that they only engage in 3rd person interpretation at Jamestown. You enjoyed wandering around Plimoth Patuxet with few visible interpreters who had to be engaged by the visitors but complain about how the interpretation at Jamestown relies on interpreters engaging the visitors. You like the immersive atmosphere at Plimoth but complain about the lack of interpretive signage at Jamestown. You visited Plimoth Patuxet on a Saturday with few other visitors and no school groups but came to Jamestown on a moderately busy day with multiple school groups visible as you moved around. You excused the unstaffed sites at Plimoth and criticized the unstaffed sites at Jamestown. Historic clothing is also a useful interpretive resource whether you are conducting 1st or 3rd person interpretation. I've seen the printed literature from both museums and they have similar features like basic interpretive info, maps and demo schedules. You make assumptions that Virginia Indians were not consulted about the layout, construction or material culture at Jamestown's Powhatan Indian Town when the exact opposite is true. Both museums are considered to be at the forefront of the living history education and you might be surprised to find out how many staff and volunteers at both museums have worked or volunteered at both sites, including some of the management. Overall these two museums have more in common than not and your reviews of them seem unreasonable and oddly biased.
Hi Kristopher, thanks for your thoughts and keen attention! We actually visited Jamestown Settlement first (dates given in the videos), but you’re correct that visiting one on a Saturday and the other on a weekday gave us different experiences. That being said, we try to focus on methodological differences that would not be seriously impacted by visitor volume. I appreciate your close watching, but there are several key differences between the sites. First and most important, Plimoth Patuxet is explicit about why they’ve chosen each approach and what visitors can expect in each site on the literature or signage-this isn’t something I saw at Jamestown. In other words, I think it’s important that Plimoth Patuxet explains what kind of interpretation (1st or 3rd) visitors will get at each site and why. As to your other comments, I disagree that Plimoth Patuxet had as many “unstaffed sites” as Jamestown (there were dozens of staff we interacted with, at Jamestown I saw no more than 7 interpreters and was only able to speak with 4). Every house in the English Village at Plimoth Patuxet was staffed, as was the craft centre, and Wampanoag Homesite. The only “unstaffed” buildings were the summer home at the Wampanoag site, barn, and fort, the first because the staff were at the more seasonally appropriate winter wetu. I do not assume that Indigenous people were excluded from the creation of the Powhatan Village, I assert that there is nothing on site (or on the museum’s website) that I saw that told us otherwise in order to point out the need for this. Another significant difference is that Plimoth Patuxet has all of its interpretative material outside-there are no traditional museum exhibits in the visitor centre. I personally thought this improved the quality of the outdoor spaces with regards to resource allocation and the depth of information provided by the living history sites. I understand this is not everyone’s preference. I am sorry that you found our assessment to be unfair-it is my intention to outline my impression of these sites as well as to point out where they could be improved when appropriate. I know museums are much loved institutions and that a lot of work and care goes into running them. What I’m most interested in is the educational value of these sites and in that respect there is always room to improve.
I think you clearly have a bias. I have been to the Jamestowne settlement several times and feel it gives a broad interpretation of the era and not specific to the specifics of the “English” “African” and “Native American” communities. I would you like to post a video on how you would create a historical village to engage all ages and demographics. Also, how would you recruit actual indigenous peoples of the Powhatan nation. Your video was at best a means to bash an institution. I suggest you collaborate with the institution to make it a better educational experience keeping in mind the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd person reenactment. I don’t think you know what it means to portray history much the reason you have limited views and comments.
Hi there, I'm sorry that you didn't feel that this review of the living history at Jamestown Settlement represented your experience. The videos on Plimoth Patuxet and Historic Huguenot Street, I think, answer your other questions. We're certainly open to suggestions and look forward to working more closely with museum staff in upcoming videos, but this channel's purpose is to rate the educational value of each site we visit. We work hard to highlight what each museum does well as well as where there is room to improve--but we only spend one day at each site. Please feel free to share anything you feel we've missed in the comments!
@@HistoriaNostratube thank you for the response. I don’t usually get a response much less a timely one from most. I will look up your videos on Plimouth patuxit and historic huguenot street, as I’ve been to them as well and review them. History is hard to interpret when not using primary sources and ideals of current America skew it even more. Historians and historic ambassadors have an obligation to not seek blame or criticism but ways to improve organizations to better tell our story.
@@houseofburgesses4332 Certainly, it's interesting to compare the different approaches each site takes to see what works and what doesn't. We look forward to your thoughts on the other museums! Happy watching!
I see this video presenter is a Canadian----this further complicates the lens through which this sharp criticism is provided. I highly question the efficacy of these critiques. In comments, the video presenter alludes to Canada's Truth and Reconciliation commission., which still has much to account for based on the recent discovery of First Nation remains found at the Canadian indigenous "schools." I think a video presented as a true tourist versus "posing" as an expert in the field of US history would have been much more ethical.
Great job. I agree with the requirement for non-Europeans to represent their historical communities. I've had several problematic conversations about this. I hope you follow up with your commentary on this with a future episode.
Hi there, thanks for your thoughts! We certainly hope to visit some Indigenous-run museums in the future! The point here is that museums that aren't run by Indigenous communities directly should still include Indigenous peoples and make it clear on site how that is done. In Canada, where I live, museums have been changing practices in response to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, but it applies on the other side of the border as well.
Sorry but from what I see you would have to go back in time and bring 17th c members of Powhatans Condfederacy to the present day and staff the native exhibit with them. Many Modern day people claiming native ancestry aren't going to have the right look and therefore the accuracy of the native village will be compromised. Having folks with Euro, afro, or hispanic physical features misrepresents the past. You should inform the public that there are differences between modern natives and ones from centuries past. Educate them, not confuse them.
Who really cares if the interpreter is indigenous or not. You clearly have an axe to grind about what happened all those years ago. It's history. The history of the world is a series of conflicts and conquests by one group over another. I appreciate that both " sides " need to present their part of the stories and events that occurred. This is something that has not often been allowed in the past. The white Europeans do not have a monopoly on racism, xenophobia, and political and religious persecution of those who are different from them. Just try to present the facts based upon information from both sides as well as archeological information and let people make up their minds as to what to believe. The truth probably will be found somewhere in the middle.
Hi there Pat, thanks for your thoughts. Among public and academic historians, consensus about this has been changing--as Graham's comment indicates this is something we'll address in a future video. The truth is, history is not objective and the stories told change depending who's telling them. I agree with you, that it really doesn't matter who is interpreting the history if the institution itself does not involve people of colour when creating their exhibits or docent guides. Indigenising museums requires Indigenous involvement from the bottom up. Also, a clarification that I'm not accusing Jamestown Settlement of excluding Powhatan communities from their Powhatan Village exhibit--only acknowledging that there is a lack of transparency about recruitment and development on site.
Hello, I myself am a volunteer in the Powhatan village, I also am a Nansemond Indian with mostly Irish and Western European blood, I have blue eyes and blonde hair. My ancestors were a part of the Powhatan confederacy. Jamestown settlement does work with local indigenous tribes including the Pamunkey, Mattaponi, Nansemond, Chickahominy, Rappahannock, and Pattawomek nations. When making statements as you did, you have to remember that Virginia Indians (which is what we prefer to be called) work and live the same as most other people in Virginia. You also have to remember that the Pamunkey and Mattaponi reservations are almost an hour and a half away from James city county. My people come from about 35 miles down the James river from Jamestown and it takes me almost two hours to get to work on country backroads. All of the yehakins are historically accurate and staged as real living spaces. There is not just one yehakin staged for interpretation, we choose where we want to be working that day. Each yehakin has to be smoked out usually once a month, it just so happened that he was smoking out that yehakin on that particular day. Powhatan adults would have been the only ones sleeping on the raised platforms. Children would have slept on mats and hides stacked high on the floor this is why there isn’t much raised bedding. We do not portray specific characters because sadly there is not much known about individual people from paspehegh. We have to have all of our sites in close range to one another because there is just simply not enough suitable space anywhere else in the park. Thank you for your concerns but we have it all figured out
Hi there Ethan! Thank you for your feedback and corrections.
I think you may have interpreted our comments about things that were not clearly communicated to visitors on the day we visited Jamestown Settlement as criticisms of the museum itself. I apologise that this was not clear to you. There is a difference between efforts made on the museum's part and what visitors come away from the site feeling they've learned/been told. Our suggestion is that Jamestown Settlement do more to close this gap--for example, by publicising how they recruit volunteers or staff to work in the Powhatan Village.
We are aware that there are certain constraints on museums based on decisions made in the past (size of site, for example). The consequences of these choices, none the less, influence modern visitor experience which is our primary interest.
Thanks again for your careful watching and for offering your expertise!
Thank you for your comments. I too am mixed race/heritage--although still have what is considered typical NA features, even though my blood is very old ---Cherokee, Mohawk, and Seneca. I was raised in Hampton Roads VA, although my father's family are from Western NC. They migrated to Hampton Roads in the early 20th century for work. I spent many Sunday afternoons listening to the stories from the mountains near Cherokee---even though we had fully "integrated," we missed the old home.
One thing my father made sure he did was expose us to NA cultures, and the visits first to the old Powhatan village in Hampton VA, and later to the Jamestown village played a huge and important role in learning. And it meant a lot to my father personally that there were other NA people in the region trying to educate the community. The Nansemond and Pamunkey were a huge part of my education, and I am grateful.
Each generation views the history and culture through their own filters. I find some of this video too clinical and judgmental. Just, if not more, important is the need to be able to tell the history and explain the culture of the people. I am sad that someone would be judgmental because of someone's skin, hair or eye color. It is the culture, the stories, the history that is important.
I would encourage this video presenter to learn more about NA peoples. And to focus on the Indian Removal Acts----how the government later used censuses to reclassify NA peoples, deny them rights as citizens, and tear families apart. Also learning about the "re-education" schools (one in Hampton VA--Hampton University) that were used to separate people from their culture. Maybe then, the presenter would better understand why not everyone "looks Indian"---and why it is more important to focus on the culture.
I am disappointed in this video.
@@morgainedepolloc4161 who are the NA people?
I want to do a little video on Jamestown and maybe you can help me do it?
They descend from a 1638 Indian/White marriage. They should be considered a social club rather than a tribe.
One of my direct ancestors was a shareholder in the Virginia Company. He settled in Jamestown in the early 1620s and was part of the government commission that investigated an Indian uprising shortly before he arrived.
If you wanted a narrative of the site, you could have taken the guided tour, which gives an overview of exactly what you were looking for. The interpreters do give overall narratives if you were to ask, but the reality of interpretation is that it is fluid. It doesn’t look like you took a guided tour. So your criticisms stemming from a lack of narrative seem to stem from that issue.
Regarding hiring practices of indigenous people. The Jamestown Yorktown foundation is run my the Virginia department of education and must conform to the state hiring regulations which include non discriminatory practices that every state agency must abide by. JYF has always had a very close relationship with the indigenous tribes of Virginia. The job listings and recruiting have always been openly shared with the Virginia tribal leadership. When positions in the interpretive sites are open, JYF must hire from a pool of applicants. If there are no indigenous people applying, JYF can’t sit and wait and hold positions open because not enough indigenous people are applying. They need to fill these positions. If positions are not filled, the state will remove that position from the JYF budget the next fiscal year.
I found your criticisms of Jamestown Settlement to be pretty off base and unfair to the museum because of how you approached the site. Did you go multiple days or did you just go based on a single walk through? How much time did you spend in each interpretive site? Did you reach out to JYF to see what programs are offered to visitors?
Hi David, thank you very much for your thoughts and comments.
Many of your concerns relate to a lack of knowledge about my method in visiting these sites-we will do better about explaining this in future videos. Our approach is to visit the site once (as most tourists/students would) to see what the average visitor would be presented on any given day. I believe that museums should be able to provide all guests with a sound history regardless of whether a visitor pays more for a tour or takes a self-guided tour, but I understand not everyone shares this opinion.
There are many things at Jamestown Settlement that could be updated to give all visitors a better understanding of the site’s history-that is what I found when I visited. Perhaps we will do a review of 1607: A Nation Takes Root as an example. But I sympathise with the museum’s dual-mandate to teach history and to attract guests. I speak more to this in my video about Historic Jamestowne.
I also understand from my own museum experience the struggle to staff museums within the constraints of grants. I think it is still feasible and important to make practices more clear on site. You might view my video on Plimoth Patuxet for examples of how they’ve done this successfully.
Thanks again for your interest and feedback, which is always welcome.
The tours are free of charge and the narrative you seek is well explained in the indoor galleries.
The “average visitor” tends to get a very superficial understanding of the history. This is not for a lack of effort on the museum, this is the problem of limited time on the visitors’ part. When you distill a complex history into the average museum visitor’s time frame, you have to make difficult positions. What is important home person is not as important to others. The story of the indigenous people is extremely important, but it is only one part of the very important story that Jamestown has to tell as the first permanent English settlement in the new world.
I’m not really sure what part of the narrative you think that Jamestown needs to “do a better job” explaining.
Hi David, we were neither invited to take a tour when we visited nor did we see anything about free tours being offered that day, but I agree that this would have improved our experience. I will comment that if a site requires a tour to be understood, guests should be automatically placed on a tour as soon as they leave the theatre with the introductory video.
The missing piece is, as I say in the video, a view of what life was actually like at Jamestown or in the Powhatan Confederacy in the period represented. As you say, much of this IS present in the written exhibits-but we would like to see these elements brought outside as many visitors skipped the indoor exhibits. I invite you to view some of my other videos for examples of how other sites have approached this. There is no perfect method, but demonstration-based museums lack a level of coherency present at other sites.
Thanks again for the clarification and I appreciate your enthusiasm for local history.
Having also watched your video about Plimoth Patuxet it sounds like you went to Plimoth first and don't like Jamestown because they do things differently. You praise the 3rd person interpretation at the Wampanoag town but criticize the 3rd person interpretation at Jamestown. You are entertained by the 1st person interpretation in Plimoth and seem disappointed that they only engage in 3rd person interpretation at Jamestown. You enjoyed wandering around Plimoth Patuxet with few visible interpreters who had to be engaged by the visitors but complain about how the interpretation at Jamestown relies on interpreters engaging the visitors. You like the immersive atmosphere at Plimoth but complain about the lack of interpretive signage at Jamestown. You visited Plimoth Patuxet on a Saturday with few other visitors and no school groups but came to Jamestown on a moderately busy day with multiple school groups visible as you moved around. You excused the unstaffed sites at Plimoth and criticized the unstaffed sites at Jamestown. Historic clothing is also a useful interpretive resource whether you are conducting 1st or 3rd person interpretation. I've seen the printed literature from both museums and they have similar features like basic interpretive info, maps and demo schedules. You make assumptions that Virginia Indians were not consulted about the layout, construction or material culture at Jamestown's Powhatan Indian Town when the exact opposite is true. Both museums are considered to be at the forefront of the living history education and you might be surprised to find out how many staff and volunteers at both museums have worked or volunteered at both sites, including some of the management. Overall these two museums have more in common than not and your reviews of them seem unreasonable and oddly biased.
Hi Kristopher, thanks for your thoughts and keen attention! We actually visited Jamestown Settlement first (dates given in the videos), but you’re correct that visiting one on a Saturday and the other on a weekday gave us different experiences. That being said, we try to focus on methodological differences that would not be seriously impacted by visitor volume.
I appreciate your close watching, but there are several key differences between the sites. First and most important, Plimoth Patuxet is explicit about why they’ve chosen each approach and what visitors can expect in each site on the literature or signage-this isn’t something I saw at Jamestown. In other words, I think it’s important that Plimoth Patuxet explains what kind of interpretation (1st or 3rd) visitors will get at each site and why.
As to your other comments, I disagree that Plimoth Patuxet had as many “unstaffed sites” as Jamestown (there were dozens of staff we interacted with, at Jamestown I saw no more than 7 interpreters and was only able to speak with 4). Every house in the English Village at Plimoth Patuxet was staffed, as was the craft centre, and Wampanoag Homesite. The only “unstaffed” buildings were the summer home at the Wampanoag site, barn, and fort, the first because the staff were at the more seasonally appropriate winter wetu.
I do not assume that Indigenous people were excluded from the creation of the Powhatan Village, I assert that there is nothing on site (or on the museum’s website) that I saw that told us otherwise in order to point out the need for this.
Another significant difference is that Plimoth Patuxet has all of its interpretative material outside-there are no traditional museum exhibits in the visitor centre. I personally thought this improved the quality of the outdoor spaces with regards to resource allocation and the depth of information provided by the living history sites. I understand this is not everyone’s preference.
I am sorry that you found our assessment to be unfair-it is my intention to outline my impression of these sites as well as to point out where they could be improved when appropriate. I know museums are much loved institutions and that a lot of work and care goes into running them. What I’m most interested in is the educational value of these sites and in that respect there is always room to improve.
No likes or dislikes is very telling.
I think you clearly have a bias. I have been to the Jamestowne settlement several times and feel it gives a broad interpretation of the era and not specific to the specifics of the “English” “African” and “Native American” communities. I would you like to post a video on how you would create a historical village to engage all ages and demographics. Also, how would you recruit actual indigenous peoples of the Powhatan nation. Your video was at best a means to bash an institution. I suggest you collaborate with the institution to make it a better educational experience keeping in mind the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd person reenactment. I don’t think you know what it means to portray history much the reason you have limited views and comments.
Hi there, I'm sorry that you didn't feel that this review of the living history at Jamestown Settlement represented your experience. The videos on Plimoth Patuxet and Historic Huguenot Street, I think, answer your other questions. We're certainly open to suggestions and look forward to working more closely with museum staff in upcoming videos, but this channel's purpose is to rate the educational value of each site we visit. We work hard to highlight what each museum does well as well as where there is room to improve--but we only spend one day at each site. Please feel free to share anything you feel we've missed in the comments!
@@HistoriaNostratube thank you for the response. I don’t usually get a response much less a timely one from most. I will look up your videos on Plimouth patuxit and historic huguenot street, as I’ve been to them as well and review them. History is hard to interpret when not using primary sources and ideals of current America skew it even more. Historians and historic ambassadors have an obligation to not seek blame or criticism but ways to improve organizations to better tell our story.
@@houseofburgesses4332 Certainly, it's interesting to compare the different approaches each site takes to see what works and what doesn't. We look forward to your thoughts on the other museums! Happy watching!
I see this video presenter is a Canadian----this further complicates the lens through which this sharp criticism is provided.
I highly question the efficacy of these critiques.
In comments, the video presenter alludes to Canada's Truth and Reconciliation commission., which still has much to account for based on the recent discovery of First Nation remains found at the Canadian indigenous "schools."
I think a video presented as a true tourist versus "posing" as an expert in the field of US history would have been much more ethical.
Great job. I agree with the requirement for non-Europeans to represent their historical communities. I've had several problematic conversations about this. I hope you follow up with your commentary on this with a future episode.
Thanks Graham, I’d definitely like to! I’ll definitely follow up with you about your experiences when we get a chance to do that.
No one is stopping indigenous people from opening there own museum to tell there story too.
Hi there, thanks for your thoughts! We certainly hope to visit some Indigenous-run museums in the future! The point here is that museums that aren't run by Indigenous communities directly should still include Indigenous peoples and make it clear on site how that is done. In Canada, where I live, museums have been changing practices in response to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, but it applies on the other side of the border as well.
Sorry but the truth and reconciliation commission looks more like the color revolution to me.
Sorry but from what I see you would have to go back in time and bring 17th c members of Powhatans Condfederacy to the present day and staff the native exhibit with them. Many Modern day people claiming native ancestry aren't going to have the right look and therefore the accuracy of the native village will be compromised. Having folks with Euro, afro, or hispanic physical features misrepresents the past.
You should inform the public that there are differences between modern natives and ones from centuries past. Educate them, not confuse them.
.Amazing Village House Tour Channel Movie in Year in Year August 8,2023.😐.
Who really cares if the interpreter is indigenous or not. You clearly have an axe to grind about what happened all those years ago. It's history. The history of the world is a series of conflicts and conquests by one group over another. I appreciate that both " sides " need to present their part of the stories and events that occurred. This is something that has not often been allowed in the past. The white Europeans do not have a monopoly on racism, xenophobia, and political and religious persecution of those who are different from them. Just try to present the facts based upon information from both sides as well as archeological information and let people make up their minds as to what to believe. The truth probably will be found somewhere in the middle.
Hi there Pat, thanks for your thoughts. Among public and academic historians, consensus about this has been changing--as Graham's comment indicates this is something we'll address in a future video. The truth is, history is not objective and the stories told change depending who's telling them. I agree with you, that it really doesn't matter who is interpreting the history if the institution itself does not involve people of colour when creating their exhibits or docent guides. Indigenising museums requires Indigenous involvement from the bottom up. Also, a clarification that I'm not accusing Jamestown Settlement of excluding Powhatan communities from their Powhatan Village exhibit--only acknowledging that there is a lack of transparency about recruitment and development on site.