As we learned from watching Why Historical Thinking Matters, historians undertake extensive research to try to understand what happened in the past, why it happened, and who was involved. Usually, this means synthesizing information from several sources.

In many cases, historians have examined countless sources carefully and come to a consensus about what happened and why. For example, the vast majority of U.S. historians maintain that slavery was the root cause of the U.S. Civil War.

In other cases, however, a consensus fails to emerge, or new evidence leads historians to challenge older consensuses. For example, new information comes periodically to light about John F. Kennedy’s assassination, and historians—professional and amateur—use the new information to shore up, tweak, or dismantle older understandings of that event.

Of course, being human, historians are not objective—recall our consideration of the various lenses through which all of us see the world. Regardless of where they work, historians live in an everyday world in which politics, religious faith, and culture push and pull at individuals and groups. Professional historians try not to let their political views color too heavily their interpretation of the past, but sometimes it happens, consciously or not.

When amateur historians and people untrained in history get involved in interpreting the past, things can get downright contentious.

This week, we’re going to look at varying interpretations of the first Thanksgiving—one of the very first historical events about which U.S. children learn in school. You’ll be asked to reflect on your own schooling as well as consider various other interpretations of the event.