First Thanksgiving in America

[Trippen]

The first American Thanksgiving was celebrated in 1621, to commemorate the harvest reaped by the Plymouth Colony after a harsh winter. In that year Governor William Bradford proclaimed a day of thanksgiving. The colonists celebrated it as a traditional English harvest feast, to which they invited the local Wampanoag Indians

http://www.infoplease.com/spot/tgturkey1.html
I don't think the Indians were too friendly with the colonists so I find it hard to believe that it really happened but it makes for a nice holiday anyway. 

[Phidippides]

For some essays on what it was like for the original Thanksgiving celebrators at the Plymouth colony, read the Plimoth Plantation website offerings.

[Stumpfoot]

As with many things in history, the reality is much different then tradition.

[DonaldBaker]

The Pilgrims suffered many hardships.  Many of which were from their own short sightedness.

[Stumpfoot]

Many times people take things for granted inlife, and I think that was especially true with the english (and later american) dealings with the indians.

[Phidippides]

Well, happy Thanksgiving everyone!  I wish I had some early Colonial songs to share here.  I added a link in the Links section on songs through American history, but I'm not sure if any are songs the Pilgrims might have sung.  Then again, if they were Pilgrims, would they have sung secular songs?

Brings me to another point - were the Pilgrims that landed at Plymouth a sect of the Puritans who were being marginalized in by Anglican authority in England in the 1620s?

[DonaldBaker]

Well, happy Thanksgiving everyone!  I wish I had some early Colonial songs to share here.  I added a link in the Links section on songs through American history, but I'm not sure if any are songs the Pilgrims might have sung.  Then again, if they were Pilgrims, would they have sung secular songs?

Brings me to another point - were the Pilgrims that landed at Plymouth a sect of the Puritans who were being marginalized in by Anglican authority in England in the 1620s?

Basically yes they were.  They still paid their tithes to the Church of England, but their religious views lost out once Cromwell's reign ended.  So the New World was offered as a place to practice as they wanted without them feeling the sting of censorship in England.  It was also a good way for England to remove "deviants" from its society in a more peaceful manner.  The Quakers were even more marginalized than the Puritans.  Pacifists were not much good for serving in the King's army or navy especially in an age of empire so when the Quakers signed up for the New World, it was a "good" thing in the eyes of the British government.

[Phidippides]

Basically yes they were.  They still paid their tithes to the Church of England, but their religious views lost out once Cromwell's reign ended.  So the New World was offered as a place to practice as they wanted without them feeling the sting of censorship in England.  It was also a good way for England to remove "deviants" from its society in a more peaceful manner.  The Quakers were even more marginalized than the Puritans.  Pacifists were not much good for serving in the King's army or navy especially in an age of empire so when the Quakers signed up for the New World, it was a "good" thing in the eyes of the British government.

So how, exactly, did the Pilgrims differ from the Puritans?  And was "Pilgrim" the name that they adopted for their sect, or was it given to them by historians?  If they adopted it on their own, I'm guessing it was meant to describe their spiritual (not physical) journey, correct?

[DonaldBaker]

Basically yes they were.  They still paid their tithes to the Church of England, but their religious views lost out once Cromwell's reign ended.  So the New World was offered as a place to practice as they wanted without them feeling the sting of censorship in England.  It was also a good way for England to remove "deviants" from its society in a more peaceful manner.  The Quakers were even more marginalized than the Puritans.  Pacifists were not much good for serving in the King's army or navy especially in an age of empire so when the Quakers signed up for the New World, it was a "good" thing in the eyes of the British government.

So how, exactly, did the Pilgrims differ from the Puritans?  And was "Pilgrim" the name that they adopted for their sect, or was it given to them by historians?  If they adopted it on their own, I'm guessing it was meant to describe their spiritual (not physical) journey, correct?

I'm not sure how the Pilgrim term came into being.  I will have to research that.  Maybe someone else knows?

[Phidippides]

Happy Thanksgiving, all!

Incidentally, I heard someone mention today that the idea of the early colonists (the Puritans, at least) as overly rigid, loveless persons was more of a construct of Nathanial Hawthorne than it was of a description of the actual people.  In fact, they tried to model their society in love following a Pauline model, so it was much warmer than people may imagine.  There was mention that this latter view/finding was from the publication of some historian at Harvard (I don't have his name).  Anyone else know more about the socio-religious dynamics of the early colonists?