Have you heard of the Bayeux Tapestry? It's a near 230-foot exceptional embroidery that tells the story of the Battle of Hastings. In AD 1066, William of Normandy crossed a turbulent English Channel and conquered England, taking the crown from Harold, who had ascended to the throne after the death of his brother-in-law, King Edward (later known as Edward the Confessor.)
But there is more to that story that just the basic facts, and the creators of the Tapestry knew it. So much so, they didn’t begin in 1066 with William’s conquest. Instead, they started in 1064 with a scene depicting an exchange between Edward and Harold. Why? Because, what transpired between them was the motivation for William’s invasion.
As the Tapestry indicates, history is chronological; a linear stream of complex “causes and motivations, rather than simple dates and events.” (She says, quoting a different source.) And the Americas’ stream of causality dates back centuries before the Spanish stepped foot in the New World.
As one must view the Bayeux Tapestry from the beginning to understand the Norman invasion, its motivation and full impact, so too should one go back centuries before to fully understand the American Tapestry. Back to the time of William (which is why he is—or he once was—brought up so often in history classes and legal courses), to the abuses of the Plantagenet kings, and the eventual issuing of the Magna Carta and the subsequent abuses of King George.
Too many fail to do so and instead, view history from the beginning of the colonies to our present-day world. In doing so, we don't realize we're looking at a few panels of a much larger picture. Many also tend to view American history through the lens of modern thinking. This results in a condemnation of just about everything our forefathers did without an accurate understand of the complex causes and motivations that drove them.
We blame the settlers for taking land from the natives. Today, such an act is reprehensible, as it should be. Invasions of lands by a foreign entity is comparatively rare and is often met by a coalition of allies gathering to stop it, such as we saw in the fight against the Japanese and German Empires during WWII. Not so in past centuries. Invasions were a common occurrence, with kings and peoples constantly fighting for territory. From Muslims and Crusaders slaying one another for possession of the Holy Land, to the Vikings and the constant warring between England and France (and other countries I’ve yet to read about) land constantly changed hands at the expense of the common people.
Greed and the violence it takes to obtain that which people covet is the nature of fallen human beings.
With that history behind them, the Spanish didn’t think twice before moving into and conquering what is now Mexico and South American. In their eyes, they were justified, and they reaped a treasure trove of gold and silver for their efforts. Since they were the invading Japanese and Germans of their day, it shouldn’t be a surprise that, for various reasons including security, England—who had been on the verge of falling to Spain—established colonies in the northern region of the New World, in part to stop the flow of gold that financed the invasions.
In doing so, they took land from the natives, as did those who followed for religious and financial reasons stemming from intolerable causes of the time. Unconscionable today, but again, it was typical of the time. Even natives routinely slaughtered one another and fought for territory (sorry, but they weren’t peace loving folks who lived at one with nature. The various nations had warriors, arrows, and tomahawks for a reason, which predated the arrival of the Spanish and Europeans.* And it wasn't just for hunting. People are people, wherever they are.)
In other words, no one was acting out of character back then. They were following the “causes and motivations” of the day and emulating behaviors from the generations before them. The same with slavery. Too many believe the African slavery era rose and set with America, when it actually dates back to the 7th century. While first primarily localized to the Middle East and Asia, it crept into Europe sometime around the 14th or 15th century. So it naturally followed to the Americas. Only a small percentage were barbarously shipped to the US Colonies. Millions upon millions were taken to South America and the Caribbean to work dangerous sugar plantations. In the United States, it first ended in the north and then in the south, and finally, in the Caribbean.
We cannot change the facts of the past. Since history is linear, it’s done with and gone. While the world is still filled with fallen people who prefer to hurt and crush others, in so many ways, the world is better than it was back then. And yet, too many are stuck in the mire of the past. However, the past is a mental abyss that can bring no comfort or resolution.
On an individual level, we advise people to come to grips with their past whether or not the offending party acknowledges their role in the pain, to take the lessons and growth born from the experience, and to move forward living life as a better person. I think that’s great advice.
We can continue the national anger and hate, but to what end? The past is gone. Let's use it as motivation to be better and to move on.
* Initially, the natives and settlers did try to live together in peace and mutual trade, but increasing abuses on both sides damaged the relationships until one power overcame the other. Again, brutal and wrong, but typical for the age.