Historic Trauma and Aboriginal Healing

Introduction
biological givens and social context” (Ursano, McCaughey and Fullerton, 1994:5). For the past five
hundred years, entire Indigenous communities have been traumatized by multiple deaths from disease,
expulsion from their homelands, loss of economic and self-sufficiency, removal of children from their
homes, assimilation tactics and incarceration in residential schools. Historic experiences of trauma
were compounded by a loss of ceremonial freedom, dance, song and other methods that would have
helped Indigenous people express and grieve their losses (Kehoe, 1989; Sullivan, 1989; Ross, 1992). It
is understood today that massive suppression, when it is resorted to because of imposed hegemony, is
particularly important to address, since it predisposes individuals to repeated traumatization in very
specific ways (Freud, 1985; Furst, 1967; Figley, 1985; Wilson, 1989), as defined in Herman’s (1997)
Trauma and Recovery. Psychologists have stressed that no traumatic event is ever wholly assimilated
and, to some degree, an increased vulnerability invariably persists, if only to create repetitions of the
original trauma (Freud, 1985; Greenacre, 1958).
In the Americas, Indigenous people across the continent were subjected to severely depressing experiences,
generation after generation, beginning in the late 1400s. Current reawakening and rebuilding of
Indigenous cultural institutions can be regarded as a direct result of Indigenous people shaking off the
yoke of endemic social-cultural depression and what is being termed complex and/or endemic posttraumatic
stress disorder (Herman, 1997). The title of this paper suggests this complex is a direct result
of what is termed historic trauma (HT) and historic trauma transmission (HTT), with one (PTSD)
being the result of the others (HT and HTT); all of which are a result of unmitigated stressors.
In the past, the bulk of studies and research on post-traumatic stress disorder has been directed towards
the consequences of war, violence, disasters, genocide, etc., on individual victims. Practitioners note:
“Trauma destroys the social system of care, protection, and meaning that surrounds an individual [victims
are set apart and] “[i]mpaired social relations are the result” (Kleber, Figley and Gersons, 1995:299).
There is a belief that the meaning of trauma goes beyond the individual level and can be applied to a
broader social and cultural context. As noted in Judith Herman’s book, Trauma and Recovery: “Studies
of war and natural disasters have documented a “dose-response curve,” whereby the greater the exposure
to traumatic events, the greater the percentage of the population with symptoms of post-traumatic
stress disorder” (1997:57).
In order to create and define clear models and best practices to continue strengthening and reinforcing
Aboriginal capacity for social resolution and social action, it is necessary to understand the mechanisms
put in place by colonizers to marginalize and downgrade Aboriginal people’s personal roles and life
ways. These mechanisms served to destroy Aboriginal culture and social domains, to restrict their social
mobility, to disfavour them in access to resources and to create or accentuate inequities within and
between Aboriginal communities. Some of these mechanisms were not entirely or consciously deliberate;
nevertheless, they had the same effect on Aboriginal identity and social capacity. Other influences
included: waves of disease resulting in death and dislocation of healers, teachers and spiritual leaders;
greed for lands and resources; and unwanted or forced interpersonal interactions between invaders and
Indigenous people across the continent.
Contact with colonizers changed everything for Indigenous people. The epidemics caused severe social
disorganization for Indigenous societies. Traditional social structures, alliances and kinship ties were
disrupted. Confidence in traditional leaders and healers was undermined. Those left alive in the aftermath
4