|
By Brian J. Evans Deep within the core - amidst all the mythology, fantasy and folk lore - lies the truth, untainted, untouched, unspoken ... Scattered across a glass table, historians gather and fit together the pieces of a giant jigsaw puzzle. One puzzle, concerning the life of the Shawnee War Chief Blue Jacket, is being understood more each day. Almost nothing that is written about history is set in stone. When it comes to historical fact, the jury is always in deliberation. I want to remain as neutral as possible on this topic. I don't want to say it happened one way or another
for certain because nothing can be proven. I urge readers to decide
for themselves. With the documentation of two separate birth dates, the various references to Blue Jacket and his children, the DNA tests and the age differences, one would think there is only one rational conclusion: Chief Blue Jacket was an Indian. He cannot be identified as Marmaduke Swearingen. The ancient tale is an injustice to both men. I am still looking for evidence that would indicate otherwise. This was a period of our history in which whites and Indians intermixed greatly. One cannot say that Blue Jacket didn't have any white ancestry. That might never be known. But, from birth, he was raised among the Shawnee Indians. His brother, Red Pole, was an Indian as well. I have read some speculation arguing that he and Marmaduke could have been the same man, most of which doesn't hold any water.It only raises more questions than it answers. While I don't altogether discredit the entire Larsh letter, I take it for what it was. It was a folk lore, a story told to him by a relative concerning another, older relative. Marmaduke could have been captured by Shawnees at some point in his life. That much is plausible. He may have even adopted the name Blue Jacket after the famous chief died. Who knows? The Blue Jacket family was prolific. I believe there could have been more than one man who went by the name. Much of that remains to be seen. Author Richard Pangburn says it is still possible that Blue Jacket was Marmaduke Swearingen. He is very confident that more than one Blue Jacket lived about that time. We'll have to wait to see. The claim that Charles Van Swearingen was killed by his brother, as far as I have seen, was not a fact. It was fiction. I have not seen the slightest indication that it really happened. That claim is but one of the reasons this controversy has been mislabeled as a "war." The story has no historical evidence to support it and it has outraged many descendants. I approached this series from an academic stand
point. For a lot of people this is far more than an academic issue.
It is their heritage. Interpretations will change as new information is brought to light. There are many instances in the story that can be disputed. There are holes, gaps, conflicting statements, inaccuracies and downright dubiety. It needs examination, investigation and deliberation. Give it time, the truth will come out. With new information just beyond the horizon, I plan to continue investigating the matter on a part-time basis. Maybe sometime we will be able to clear this matter up. Who knows? Until then, people believe what they want. And all we have is a dispute. (Brian Evans is a staff writer at the Examiner and may be reached at 592-3060, ext. 118, and at bevans@examiner.org.) |
Concluding
remarks regarding Blue Jacket