with tall palm trees swaying in the wind. Columbus had found the New World. This happened on October 12, 1492. It was a great day for Christopher Columbus—and for the whole world as well.
And from a 1991 text:
When Columbus stepped ashore on Guanahani Island in October 1492, he planted the Spanish flag in the sand and claimed the land as a possession of Ferdinand and Isabella. He did so despite the obvious fact that the island already belonged to someone else—the “Indians” who gathered on the beach to gaze with wonder at the strangers who had suddenly arrived in three great, white-winged canoes. He gave no thought to the rights of the local inhabitants. Nearly every later explorer—French, English, Dutch and all the others as well as the Spanish—thoughtlessly dismissed the people they encountered. What we like to think of as the discovery of America was actually the invasion and conquest of America.
Which one of these passages is “true”? The first was the conventional textbook wisdom through the 1960s in America. The latter reflects a growing criticism that traditional American history has been told from the perspective of history’s “winners,” largely white males of European background. Together they show that history varies depending on who is doing the telling, when, and to whom. What this means to you is that the critical vigilance we urge you to apply to all information should be applied to your textbooks as well. And, yes, that means this textbook, too. In an age of mediated citizenship, you really have your work cut out for you.
There is some truth to the idea that history is written by the winners, but it is also true that the winners change over time. If history was once securely in the hands of white European males, it is now the battleground of a cultural war between those who believe the old way of telling history was accurate and those who believe it left out the considerable achievements of women and minorities and masked some of the less admirable episodes of our past.2
Bias is not reserved for history books; this textbook itself has a point of view. In these pages we have an interest in highlighting power and citizenship, in focusing on the impact of the rules in American politics, and in multiculturalism. We do not think that the outstanding political accomplishments of the traditional heroes of American history warrant ignoring the contributions of people who have not historically been powerful.
The fact that all textbooks have some sort of bias means you must be as careful in what you accept from textbook authors as you are in what you accept from any other source.
What To Watch Out For
Who selected the book? Textbooks are chosen by instructors, not the end users. Publishers have tailored the content to appeal to those making the selection. How does the politics of those individuals affect what you have been given to read?
The book’s audience. If it is a big, colorful book, it is probably aimed at a wide market. If so, what might that say about its content? If it is a smaller book with a narrower focus, who is it trying to appeal to?
The author’s point of view. Does he or she promote particular values or ideas? Are any points of view left out? Do the authors make an effort to cover both sides of an issue or a controversy? If something troubles you, locate the primary source the authors refer to in the footnotes and read it yourself.
Your own reactions. Did the book cause you to look at a subject in a new way? What is the source of your reaction? Is it intellectual or emotional?
1. These two passages accompanied Sam Dillon, “Schools Growing Harsher in Scrutiny of Columbus,” New York Times, October 12, 1992, 4, www.nytimes.com/1992/10/12/us/schools-growing-harsher-in-scrutiny-of-columbus.html. The first paragraph is from Merlin M. Ames, My Country (Sacramento: California State Department of Education, 1947); the second is from John A. Garraty, The Story of America (New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1991).
2. Frances Fitzgerald, America Revised (New York: Vintage Books, 1979); James McKinley Jr., “Texas Conservatives Win Curriculum Change,” New York Times, March 12, 2010, www.nytimes.com/2010/03/13/education/13texas.html; Laura Moser, “Texas Is Debuting Textbooks That Downplay Jim Crow and Frame Slavery as a Side Issue in the Civil War,” Slate, July 7, 2015, www.slate.com/blogs/schooled/2015/07/07/texas_textbook_revisionism_new_textbooks_in_the_lone_star_state_downplay.html.
Revolution
From the moment the unpopularly taxed tea plunged into Boston Harbor, it became apparent that Americans were not going to settle down and behave like proper and orthodox colonists. Britain was surprised by the colonial reaction, and it could not ignore it. Even before the Boston Tea Party, mobs in many towns were demonstrating and rioting against British control. Calling themselves the Sons of Liberty, and under the guidance of the eccentric and unsteady Sam Adams, cousin of future president John Adams, they routinely caused extensive damage. In early 1770 they provoked the Boston Massacre, an attack by British soldiers that left six civilians dead and further inflamed popular sentiments.
By the time of the December 1773 Boston Tea Party, also incited by the Sons of Liberty, passions were at a fever pitch. The American patriots called a meeting in Philadelphia in September 1774. Known as the First Continental Congress, the meeting declared the Coercive Acts void, announced a plan to stop trade with England, and called for a second meeting in May 1775. Before they could meet again, in the early spring of 1775, the king’s army went marching to arrest Sam Adams and another patriot, John Hancock, and to discover the hiding place of the colonists’ weapons. Roused by the silversmith Paul Revere, Americans in Lexington and Concord fired the first shots of rebellion at the British, and the Revolution was truly under way. The narrative about where the locus of power should be spread quickly, even given the limited communication channels of the day. The mobs were not fed by social media or connected electronically—the story was passed by word of mouth and, therefore, could be controlled relatively easily because each person could not disseminate ideas widely. The people who stood to gain the most financially from independence—the propertied and economic elite, the attendees at the Continental Congress—were translating a philosophical explanation for the masses to act on. Because many colonists could not read, they got their news at the tavern or at the Sunday pulpit, where it was colored by the interests of the teller, and then passed it on. The vast majority of citizens were passive recipients of the narrative.
The Declaration of Independence
In 1776, at the direction of a committee of the Continental Congress, thirty-four-year-old Thomas Jefferson sat down to write a declaration of independence from England. His training as a lawyer at the College of William and Mary and his service as a representative in the Virginia House of Burgesses helped prepare him for his task, but he had an impressive intellect in any case. President John F. Kennedy once announced to a group of Nobel Prize winners he was entertaining that they were “the most extraordinary collection of talents that has ever gathered at the White House, with the possible exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone.”8 A testimony to Jefferson’s capabilities is the strategically brilliant document that he produced.
The Declaration of Independence is first and foremost a political document. Having decided to make the break from England, the American founders had to convince themselves, their fellow colonists, and the rest of the world that they were doing the right thing. Jefferson did not have to hunt far for a good reason for his revolution. John Locke, whom we discussed in Chapter 1, had handed him
