I haven't read much from the 1619 Project, but what I've seen is most impressive. The 1776 "Project" is a joke by comparison. The loudest GQP voices on history education and race are willfully ignorant about both.
Gerald Horne, one of our most hard-working historians, concurs with 1619's view of slavery in the Revolution.
I haven't read much from the 1619 Project, but what I've seen is most impressive. The 1776 "Project" is a joke by comparison. The loudest GQP voices on history education and race are willfully ignorant about both.
Gerald Horne, one of our most hard-working historians, concurs with 1619's view of slavery in the Revolution.
Horne, Gerald. The counter-revolution of 1776: slave resistance and the origins of the United States of America. New York University, 2014. 349p index afp ISBN 9781479893409, $39.00.
Horne (Univ. of Houston) holds a distinctive view of watershed historical dates. The Glorious Revolution of 1688 brought political order to Britain and encouraged free trade. This facilitated massive slave imports into the American colonies, destabilizing colonial societies with the specter of racial conflicts and rebellious slaves allied with foreign invaders. Horne also asserts the less-familiar importance of 1772. That year's landmark Somerset decision by Lord Mansfield effectively banned slavery in England, signaling a trend in favor of rights for Africans. In June 1772, Rhode Islanders defied imperial authority by burning HMS Gaspee. Colonists' determination to continue profiting from "the slavery trade" ultimately led to independence, but 1776 was partly a counterrevolution against London's nascent antislavery sentiment. This narrative is often about white anxieties in Britain, the Caribbean, and North America. Readers seldom hear the voices of free and unfree Africans, though their actions (flight, rebellion, everyday resistance) speak clearly enough. Horne's interpretation emphasizes material factors over political philosophy and ideas in general. It directly challenges conventional views of the American Revolution but, based on extensive evidence, deserves close reading. Summing Up: Recommended. Academic and large public libraries; undergraduates and above.
Choice Vol. 52, Issue 4, Dec 2014 American Library Association. Contact permissions@ala-choice.org for permission to reproduce or redistribute.
I just have to say that I LOVE being on this forum with a bunch of historians. Not a single day goes by that I don't learn something vital and accurate. Thanks to you all.
Lynda, when I was in school, there was an essay contest every year, sponsored by the United Daughters of the Confederacy. My mother enrolled me every year, I suppose because she thought “people would talk” if she didn’t, and I wasn’t old enough to rebel. I did as little work as I could get by with. We were given time during class, when we should have been learning *anything* else, to work on these essays. This is by way of saying that any teacher who had taught us anything that went against the Glorious Cause narrative would have lost her (always her) job.
I had a few friends when I was working that did the entire foolish Daughters of the Confederacy thing up to dressing up and re-enactment. I always thought it was ridiculous, but honestly I didn't realize the harm it was doing until much later.
For the past 10 years, I’ve been indexing for the DAR Genealogical Research System, a tool to help history students, researchers, scholars and teachers. Not an “ugh.”
Thanks back at ya, Reid. We learn much from you as well.
In every course, I ask students who among them plans to be a teacher. With many business or IT majors, few if any answer Yes, especially when I taught history at a business school. My reply: "WRONG. You answered a question not posed. I didn't ask who will be a professional educator; the question is, who will purposely impart information, knowledge and/or wisdom?" Once they realize what's at issue, they understand that we all teach others: children, peers, friends, co-workers, even our bosses. (Among the worst is when we train someone who will take our job. Argh!) This also means that we're all students too, and should be throughout life.
The point: we all act as teachers, whether we know or wish it. And most LFAA readers have something to offer. So, now that we know, seize the opportunity!
TPJ, as one of the fellow historians in this conversation group, I concur that some of the most interesting work published in the last 5-10 years is reassessing not just US and North American colonial history (and how I wish people would start paying more attention to Canada in discussion of the era before the invention of the USA), but also British and European history. The impact of the Cromwellian Interregnum on the psyches of British people has been understudied. The tactics Cromwell used in Ireland against Catholics served as a blueprint for genocide in the colonies, and the expansion of the plantation system from Ulster to the colonies, with its parallel expansion of the kinds of enslaved and pressed labor developed in order to effect it, has not been discussed sufficiently by either British or US historians.
One of the biggest problems we have is that "American" history has almost always been a closed shop: Historians outside the USA have, until recently, eschewed studying US history. This is changing, but slowly. As a British historian whose background is anything but British, I find I have a different perspective on the history of the British Isles, as I am not particularly influenced by some emotion-driven notion of "patriotism" in the work I do. I am not saying that American-born historians are incapable of being critically engaged--far from it. But we have these jokers whose "education" in US history was probably taught in high school by football coaches (that's who taught US history in my high school and many others) who have absolutely no idea of how to think critically about the past. Unfortunately, they appeal to the basest emotional instincts of the dominant white population in order to demonize everyone else.
And never forget the text books that shaped the curriculum everywhere. If Texas didn’t adopt a text book, it was/is dead on arrival, as the big publishing houses well knew. Authors were carefully edited and teachers required to follow the prescribed program. I published a textbook for junior college communications with a major publisher in 1986. It took my co-author and I four years to respond to all the editing and for the company to bring the book out.
I was a teacher in a very progressive public school later. Happily, in our system teachers were free to dispense with textbooks. It made more work for teachers but such better opportunity to help students of all ages learn research skills, questioning, and discernment.
So I mentioned this in an earlier comment, but I've been thinking about it all day.
When I was in school, there was no Google. Our town, when I was young, had no bookstores: as I mentioned, the closest we had was the Hallmark store, and the "lurid paperback" rack at the supermarket, and of course, the magazine racks, and least half of which were up high with only the top edges showing. My parents got us a World Book Encyclopedia set, twenty-some volumes of the "authoritative history of everything." The county library had what it had, and there was a card catalogue, but its curation was a bit haphazard.
The real Authority was the textbooks we were given in our classes, because it consisted of material we had to memorize and regurgitate, though typically only once. There was no real synthesis of ideas, just discrete sections with discrete globs of things to memorize, regurgitate, and forget. But we all knew that if it was in the Textbook, it was right, and the teacher was wrong.
Now, I can go online and learn how to install and mud drywall (that's been a home project, and we did a good job), gather enough information to write an algorithm for reproducible floating-point sums, get an overview of global warming trends (with data), read three competing histories of the attack on Pearl Harbor, order a book on John Dee's Enochian Magick.... If I can ask the question, I can get answers.
It's like something out of Arthur C. Clarke's Against the Fall of Night.
So how DO you approach the teaching of history? Can it be summarized?
When I taught third grade my class and I researched and wrote and published neighborhood histories. We began with the neighborhood around our school, which included many olh houses as well as the site of the first gristmill in our county. We discussed how we could learn what the neighborhood was like 150 years earlier. We walked downtown to the main branch library and discovered the Sanborne insurance maps as well as old city directories. We found a history of Asheville ( our city) houses. We knocked on doors and interviewed people. Eventually we divided the research into pieces and kids wrote different sections. We invited the man who lived on the gristmill site to talk to us. We had discussions about how you could decide which was the correct answer when one source gave a different date than another. It was a fascinating project for all of us. We integrated language arts, social studies, research, etc. These were 8 and 9 year olds, and at the end of the year we went to a City Council meeting where a few of the kids got up and gave reasons why the neighborhood should be designated a historic district.(It did).
I have learned so much more about our history as a country in the last 10 years, about America as a whole, about my own state (NC) in particular. That history that l learned on my own is much more complex than the version l was taught in school. Economic forces were usually the drivers of history. I want to recommend Colin Woodard whose two books, “American Nations” and “American Character” taught me things I did not know. Check out the book descriptions on Amazon.
As I recall the 1619 view of slavery arrived as a special section of our Nytimes one Sunday. I read it and found it fascinating and plausible. I was early educated in the NY state public education system. I feel it is correct that we learned mostly the great myths about our country.
Thank you TPJ for bringing, Horne, Gerald. The counter-revolution of 1776: slave resistance and the origins of the United States of America. New York University, 2014, to our attention. I am taking the long way before returning to Gerald Home's work.
I was somewhat lost after finishing today's Letter. Only some memories of my Social Studies classes in elementary school came to mind. Seeing lean-tos and the Indian's clothing, so different from what we wore wafted into my mind. Feeling patriotic or like a 'Girl Scout' when getting into the Brotherhood spirit as a schoolgirl. It felt good widening our circle of people when in Social Studies classes. The hours there were as mini dramas. There was the sense of play absent from my academic of math and reading classes.
'The department is proposing two priorities to reach low-income students and underserved populations. The Republicans object to the one that encourages “projects that incorporate racially, ethnically, culturally, and linguistically diverse perspectives into teaching and learning.” (The Letter). I want to be in the classes for the low-income students and underserved populations; they sound a lot more interesting. Why aren't classes that incorporate racially, ethnically, etc., diverse perspectives taught to all the children? I would go farther than the Department of Education.
While we will delve into this White v. Other war that the Republicans are waging, doesn't this present a great opportunity for us to learn our American History differently? Won't we 'educated Whites' enjoy taking bites from a revised American History curriculum, in addition to fighting the current Civil War? I'm back to Gerald Home's work, TPJ. Heather is sending us back to school!
I haven't read much from the 1619 Project, but what I've seen is most impressive. The 1776 "Project" is a joke by comparison. The loudest GQP voices on history education and race are willfully ignorant about both.
Gerald Horne, one of our most hard-working historians, concurs with 1619's view of slavery in the Revolution.
Horne, Gerald. The counter-revolution of 1776: slave resistance and the origins of the United States of America. New York University, 2014. 349p index afp ISBN 9781479893409, $39.00.
Horne (Univ. of Houston) holds a distinctive view of watershed historical dates. The Glorious Revolution of 1688 brought political order to Britain and encouraged free trade. This facilitated massive slave imports into the American colonies, destabilizing colonial societies with the specter of racial conflicts and rebellious slaves allied with foreign invaders. Horne also asserts the less-familiar importance of 1772. That year's landmark Somerset decision by Lord Mansfield effectively banned slavery in England, signaling a trend in favor of rights for Africans. In June 1772, Rhode Islanders defied imperial authority by burning HMS Gaspee. Colonists' determination to continue profiting from "the slavery trade" ultimately led to independence, but 1776 was partly a counterrevolution against London's nascent antislavery sentiment. This narrative is often about white anxieties in Britain, the Caribbean, and North America. Readers seldom hear the voices of free and unfree Africans, though their actions (flight, rebellion, everyday resistance) speak clearly enough. Horne's interpretation emphasizes material factors over political philosophy and ideas in general. It directly challenges conventional views of the American Revolution but, based on extensive evidence, deserves close reading. Summing Up: Recommended. Academic and large public libraries; undergraduates and above.
Choice Vol. 52, Issue 4, Dec 2014 American Library Association. Contact permissions@ala-choice.org for permission to reproduce or redistribute.
I just have to say that I LOVE being on this forum with a bunch of historians. Not a single day goes by that I don't learn something vital and accurate. Thanks to you all.
I so agree. None of this was taught when I was in school.
Lynda, when I was in school, there was an essay contest every year, sponsored by the United Daughters of the Confederacy. My mother enrolled me every year, I suppose because she thought “people would talk” if she didn’t, and I wasn’t old enough to rebel. I did as little work as I could get by with. We were given time during class, when we should have been learning *anything* else, to work on these essays. This is by way of saying that any teacher who had taught us anything that went against the Glorious Cause narrative would have lost her (always her) job.
I had a few friends when I was working that did the entire foolish Daughters of the Confederacy thing up to dressing up and re-enactment. I always thought it was ridiculous, but honestly I didn't realize the harm it was doing until much later.
For those essays & poetry submissions, be sure to avoid the phrase “Civil War. Instead use “War Between the States.” lol
My New Englander's view: it's The War to Fulfill America's Promise. But I just say or write "Civil War."
Oh the good ole DAR! Ugh
The DAR is a very different organization than the DAC. Both have their issues, but the DAC are just plain racist.
For the past 10 years, I’ve been indexing for the DAR Genealogical Research System, a tool to help history students, researchers, scholars and teachers. Not an “ugh.”
Ditto!!
Same here.
Thanks back at ya, Reid. We learn much from you as well.
In every course, I ask students who among them plans to be a teacher. With many business or IT majors, few if any answer Yes, especially when I taught history at a business school. My reply: "WRONG. You answered a question not posed. I didn't ask who will be a professional educator; the question is, who will purposely impart information, knowledge and/or wisdom?" Once they realize what's at issue, they understand that we all teach others: children, peers, friends, co-workers, even our bosses. (Among the worst is when we train someone who will take our job. Argh!) This also means that we're all students too, and should be throughout life.
The point: we all act as teachers, whether we know or wish it. And most LFAA readers have something to offer. So, now that we know, seize the opportunity!
My thoughts exactly! SO grateful to have these lessons to wake up to each day.
TPJ, as one of the fellow historians in this conversation group, I concur that some of the most interesting work published in the last 5-10 years is reassessing not just US and North American colonial history (and how I wish people would start paying more attention to Canada in discussion of the era before the invention of the USA), but also British and European history. The impact of the Cromwellian Interregnum on the psyches of British people has been understudied. The tactics Cromwell used in Ireland against Catholics served as a blueprint for genocide in the colonies, and the expansion of the plantation system from Ulster to the colonies, with its parallel expansion of the kinds of enslaved and pressed labor developed in order to effect it, has not been discussed sufficiently by either British or US historians.
One of the biggest problems we have is that "American" history has almost always been a closed shop: Historians outside the USA have, until recently, eschewed studying US history. This is changing, but slowly. As a British historian whose background is anything but British, I find I have a different perspective on the history of the British Isles, as I am not particularly influenced by some emotion-driven notion of "patriotism" in the work I do. I am not saying that American-born historians are incapable of being critically engaged--far from it. But we have these jokers whose "education" in US history was probably taught in high school by football coaches (that's who taught US history in my high school and many others) who have absolutely no idea of how to think critically about the past. Unfortunately, they appeal to the basest emotional instincts of the dominant white population in order to demonize everyone else.
And never forget the text books that shaped the curriculum everywhere. If Texas didn’t adopt a text book, it was/is dead on arrival, as the big publishing houses well knew. Authors were carefully edited and teachers required to follow the prescribed program. I published a textbook for junior college communications with a major publisher in 1986. It took my co-author and I four years to respond to all the editing and for the company to bring the book out.
I was a teacher in a very progressive public school later. Happily, in our system teachers were free to dispense with textbooks. It made more work for teachers but such better opportunity to help students of all ages learn research skills, questioning, and discernment.
So I mentioned this in an earlier comment, but I've been thinking about it all day.
When I was in school, there was no Google. Our town, when I was young, had no bookstores: as I mentioned, the closest we had was the Hallmark store, and the "lurid paperback" rack at the supermarket, and of course, the magazine racks, and least half of which were up high with only the top edges showing. My parents got us a World Book Encyclopedia set, twenty-some volumes of the "authoritative history of everything." The county library had what it had, and there was a card catalogue, but its curation was a bit haphazard.
The real Authority was the textbooks we were given in our classes, because it consisted of material we had to memorize and regurgitate, though typically only once. There was no real synthesis of ideas, just discrete sections with discrete globs of things to memorize, regurgitate, and forget. But we all knew that if it was in the Textbook, it was right, and the teacher was wrong.
Now, I can go online and learn how to install and mud drywall (that's been a home project, and we did a good job), gather enough information to write an algorithm for reproducible floating-point sums, get an overview of global warming trends (with data), read three competing histories of the attack on Pearl Harbor, order a book on John Dee's Enochian Magick.... If I can ask the question, I can get answers.
It's like something out of Arthur C. Clarke's Against the Fall of Night.
So how DO you approach the teaching of history? Can it be summarized?
When I taught third grade my class and I researched and wrote and published neighborhood histories. We began with the neighborhood around our school, which included many olh houses as well as the site of the first gristmill in our county. We discussed how we could learn what the neighborhood was like 150 years earlier. We walked downtown to the main branch library and discovered the Sanborne insurance maps as well as old city directories. We found a history of Asheville ( our city) houses. We knocked on doors and interviewed people. Eventually we divided the research into pieces and kids wrote different sections. We invited the man who lived on the gristmill site to talk to us. We had discussions about how you could decide which was the correct answer when one source gave a different date than another. It was a fascinating project for all of us. We integrated language arts, social studies, research, etc. These were 8 and 9 year olds, and at the end of the year we went to a City Council meeting where a few of the kids got up and gave reasons why the neighborhood should be designated a historic district.(It did).
Like that. We are skewed in our objectivity (accuracy) by our emotion-driven notions.
Thanks, Linda. I hadn't considered the take-over of Ireland as prelude to other colonial endeavors. That makes perfect sense to me.
The 1619 Project Podcast is available. I highly recommend it.
The 1619 Podcast was excellent. If there are degrees of excellent, it was very!
Excellently excellent
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/08/14/magazine/1619-america-slavery.html
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2020/01/23/podcasts/1619-podcast.amp.html
I second this. The written version is even better because more expansive, but the podcast is a wonderful summary.
Thank you Kelly.
I have learned so much more about our history as a country in the last 10 years, about America as a whole, about my own state (NC) in particular. That history that l learned on my own is much more complex than the version l was taught in school. Economic forces were usually the drivers of history. I want to recommend Colin Woodard whose two books, “American Nations” and “American Character” taught me things I did not know. Check out the book descriptions on Amazon.
As I recall the 1619 view of slavery arrived as a special section of our Nytimes one Sunday. I read it and found it fascinating and plausible. I was early educated in the NY state public education system. I feel it is correct that we learned mostly the great myths about our country.
Thank you TPJ for bringing, Horne, Gerald. The counter-revolution of 1776: slave resistance and the origins of the United States of America. New York University, 2014, to our attention. I am taking the long way before returning to Gerald Home's work.
I was somewhat lost after finishing today's Letter. Only some memories of my Social Studies classes in elementary school came to mind. Seeing lean-tos and the Indian's clothing, so different from what we wore wafted into my mind. Feeling patriotic or like a 'Girl Scout' when getting into the Brotherhood spirit as a schoolgirl. It felt good widening our circle of people when in Social Studies classes. The hours there were as mini dramas. There was the sense of play absent from my academic of math and reading classes.
'The department is proposing two priorities to reach low-income students and underserved populations. The Republicans object to the one that encourages “projects that incorporate racially, ethnically, culturally, and linguistically diverse perspectives into teaching and learning.” (The Letter). I want to be in the classes for the low-income students and underserved populations; they sound a lot more interesting. Why aren't classes that incorporate racially, ethnically, etc., diverse perspectives taught to all the children? I would go farther than the Department of Education.
While we will delve into this White v. Other war that the Republicans are waging, doesn't this present a great opportunity for us to learn our American History differently? Won't we 'educated Whites' enjoy taking bites from a revised American History curriculum, in addition to fighting the current Civil War? I'm back to Gerald Home's work, TPJ. Heather is sending us back to school!
Thank you, TPJ.
Same back at ya, RD. It was good to meet onscreen through Heather's Herd. Keep the comments coming!
There is an excellent podcast of the 1619 project available on Stitcher as well as other podcast platforms