Interpreting History: The Kent State Shooting

Learning Objectives

  • Navigate differences and disagreements within primary sources covering the same historical event (as related to the Kent State shooting)

Now that we have looked at how primary sources can sometimes differ honestly with one another, let’s turn to an important event that happened in 1970, the year after Stonewall: the National Guard shooting into a crowd of students at Kent State University in Ohio.

The first eyewitness account we will consider is from Arthur Krummel, who was a National Guardsman in 1970. As you read this and other accounts, remember the importance of perspective, emphasis, and significance that we discussed on the previous page. In addition to considering the location and viewpoint of the person, what they emphasize in their accounts, and what is significant from their story, ask yourself the following questions:

  • What was the physical location of this person?
  • Is there an emotional state of the eyewitness that you can detect?
  • Are there things that this person talks about that others leave out or cover only in passing?
  • How much time has passed between the event and this witness’s recollections? Might this have an influence on what and how they remember?
  • Does this person have a moral or political belief that permeates their recollection?
  • Is there a particular group or person that the eyewitness has sympathy or empathy toward?

Account #1

Click here to read the transcript of the interview with Arthur Krummel.

In it, Krummel talks about his experiences in the National Guard and being there at Kent State. He poignantly expresses his disdain and frustration about the day when he says:

“My personal feelings, my walkaway feelings on this. The shooting had occurred, I personally couldn’t imagine shooting into a crowd of people without some real provocation. I don’t think rocks, throwing, was truly worth shooting kids. I can’t imagine shooting indiscriminately into a group. I would never condone that, but I don’t hold the kids that did that particularly guilty because a lot of situations are very tense, very scary, and the kids, in numbers, could be very scary. And, of course, you say, well we didn’t have significant training in those kind of situations. We were just kids! Who in the hell?… This is a big question I keep kicking around in my mind, what kind of an adult leadership, like [Ohio Governor] Jim Rhodes, who was running for reelection, what kind of leadership would stick a bunch of kids in the middle of a bunch of other kids and the other kids were mad at these other kids who happened to be in the National Guard and then give the one side real bullets? What kind of nut job would do that? But they did it. all kinds of discomfort. So, it seemed almost like an inevitability that, setting up that scenario, what outcome could you expect? Jesus! Anyway, that’s pretty much my testimony, my personal recollection of events…”[1]

As you read through interview, pay attention to the events leading up to the shooting.

Try It

Activity

From this account, briefly sketch out Krummel’s perspective, emphasis, and interpretation. Use the space below to jot down your ideas.

Account #2

Here is another account shared from student Chuck Ayers.

Click here to read a transcript from Lorrie Accettola, who was a senior at Kent State during the shootings.

Try It

Can you point to an instance where Ayers has an emphasis, perspective, or interpretation that differs from that of Krummel?

Account #3

Finally, we have an eyewitness account from Douglas Wrentmore, one of the students who was shot by the National Guard. A Cleveland-area news affiliate interviewed him from the hospital shortly after the shootings occurred.

You can view the transcript for “Kent State shooting anniversary” here (opens in new window).

Try It

Jot down a short observation about how Wrentmore’s recollections might differ from those of either Accettola <or Ayers> or Krummel.

Activity

Finally, can you write a 3-4 sentence narrative about what happened at Kent State, based on the primary sources you have read or watched above, reconciling the diverse emphases, interpretations, and perspectives of those three eyewitnesses? Write down your ideas in the space below.

  1. “Art Krummel Oral History,” Kent State University Libraries. Special Collections and Archives, accessed March 10, 2022, https://omeka.library.kent.edu/special-collections/items/show/1593. ↵