Textbook HISTORY: How Accurate Is It?

[Ankerson]

You should always look at history books warily. History, science and medicine have all been corrupted fairly regularly for political purposes. There is always going to be someone/group trying to twist things for their own benefit. I think it happens more openly now because there are really no repercussions to those doing it. People just seem to not care now and won't begin to care until their online activities are interrupted. If they can log online everything is OK. Most seem to not care about history or even that someone is blatantly changing it for their own benefit . Then there are others that care about everything passionately and look for stuff to take offense at. They care deeply about someone not using correct pronouns but don't care about their country.

Yes, Joe the radicals do tend to twist things and or leave out things or bury things to suit their agendas.

But then the good thing about History is that it is History and it did happen and the facts are out there no matter what someone may or may not like or agree with. The facts always override opinions and they are there.

One can't nitpick History and just overlook what they don't what to see or admit happened, or the big one, believe what they want to believe. (Code for believing the lies)

Someone who actually knows History will tear them apart in seconds with the facts. I have zero issues with doing it and have destroyed some peoples belief system over the years.

I have done it myself more than a few times over the years.

I won't do it here because it's the Spyderco Forum though.

[JD Spydo]

...
But on the other hand the history of our Presidents here in the USA is probably very accurate.

After 5 years of #FakeNews stories about Russia Russia, Russia, and the main stream media driving that propaganda to the 4 corners of the Earth, I doubt very much that the history of anything is true.

I can appreciate what you just stated. What I was referring to as far as the "USA Presidents" are concerned is more or less the statistical information about each one of the Presidents and what they accomplished during their tenure as President for the most part. I do think that a lot of that information may be spot on. Because there were so many people involved with those scenarios much of that would have been difficult to lie about.

But like yourself I'm becoming very doubtful overall. I'm beginning to gravitate toward "The Victors of Wars having the privilege of writing down what they see fit for the most part. As far as explorers and conquerors go I doubt if much of that is accurate. Because most of them were truly evil people from what I've gathered.

[Ankerson]

It actually is pretty accurate.

The issues come in when people want to believe what they want to believe.

Anything that counters that is a problem.

There is only so much time to cover things in school so it's more of a broad overview than a focused one.

Remember opinions are not facts, and never have been.

Well coming from you Ankerson I can believe it more to a degree. Because you've proven your credibility to me on more than one occasion. But with that said I still think that there must be something to the official narrative being altered at times. Because for many years the mainstream media wanted to deny (or cover up) the fact that many of the high level Nazis who did make it to South America ( Mostly Argentina & Brazil). Because with Josef Mengele ( one of the worst of all Nazis) living all the way up to 1978 it doesn't appear to me like they were looking for him all that hard??? Or some of those war criminals either changed their identity or paid their way in gold or other types of money.

But that's just one segment of history in question.

Also lately it appears like there is a lot of new revelations regarding the USA Civil War of the 1800s. But to be fair all of that seems to change constantly.

And the fact that schools are limited in their depth of discussion is truly a valid point as well. But I still think that money and position can tend to corrupt things. Maybe the USA history is more accurate because there are a lot of checks and balances in the education system that doesn't exist in many other parts of the planet.

The way I see it is let the facts stand as they are the FACTS.

There will be people who don't like it.

My opinion is that's just too bad.

The facts need to be stuck to and mistakes need to be learned from. (We would all be better off for it too in the end)

The wonderful thing about History is the facts are out there if one wants to know the true facts and what actually happened.

And in the non slanted form, just the facts jack as the old saying goes.

History is not all rose peddles and chocolate nor is it there to appease one side or the other.

[JD Spydo]

And for Columbus to be put into a positive light is more than a "stretch" in my opinion. Serious history buffs just know better than that. Because I'm convinced that explorer Leif Erickson did indeed find the North American continent long before Columbus ever set sail.

If a tree falls in the forest, and nobody hears it, did it make a noise? Erickson, and other Scandinavians may very well have visited the east coast of North America long before Columbus and Asians may very well have done the same on the west coast. But, if they did, their discoveries were not acted upon by their peers. Perhaps saying that Columbus "discovered" America is a bit of an exaggeration, but his voyage was definitely the first that lead to further exploration and colonization.

A college professor who used to be a neighbor of mine told me that many scholars are now subscribing to the belief that Leif Erickson the Viking Sailor most certainly was the main guy who was given credit for the discovery of the North American continent.
He also told me that Italian sailor/merchant Amerigo Vespucci was more or less given the credit for the europeans discovering the South American continent. I tend to believe that because the term "America" was derived from his name. Also concerning Columbus that same college professor told me that Columbus had a really bad reputation for treating indigenous peoples very badly. That alone would have prevented me from creating a holiday named after him.
But you do make a point to be considered in some ways Bottom Line: We may never know the real truth which European actually paved the way to American civilization.

Also that same professor told me that there is a lot of evidence that some Chinese Sailors most definitely visited the West Coast of the North American continent way before Columbus ever set foot on the east coast. I find the professor to be very educated and very believable. I think he was on the right track. Overall we just have to take their word for it. That alone doesn't give me much confidence in any of their accounts as being the authentic truth.

[Ankerson]

And for Columbus to be put into a positive light is more than a "stretch" in my opinion. Serious history buffs just know better than that. Because I'm convinced that explorer Leif Erickson did indeed find the North American continent long before Columbus ever set sail.

If a tree falls in the forest, and nobody hears it, did it make a noise? Erickson, and other Scandinavians may very well have visited the east coast of North America long before Columbus and Asians may very well have done the same on the west coast. But, if they did, their discoveries were not acted upon by their peers. Perhaps saying that Columbus "discovered" America is a bit of an exaggeration, but his voyage was definitely the first that lead to further exploration and colonization.

A college professor who used to be a neighbor of mine told me that many scholars are now subscribing to the belief that Leif Erickson the Viking Sailor most certainly was the main guy who was given credit for the discovery of the North American continent.
He also told me that Italian sailor/merchant Amerigo Vespucci was more or less given the credit for the europeans discovering the South American continent. I tend to believe that because the term "America" was derived from his name. Also concerning Columbus that same college professor told me that Columbus had a really bad reputation for treating indigenous peoples very badly. That alone would have prevented me from creating a holiday named after him.
But you do make a point to be considered in some ways Bottom Line: We may never know the real truth which European actually paved the way to American civilization.

Also that same professor told me that there is a lot of evidence that some Chinese Sailors most definitely visited the West Coast of the North American continent way before Columbus ever set foot on the east coast. I find the professor to be very educated and very believable. I think he was on the right track. Overall we just have to take their word for it. That alone doesn't give me much confidence in any of their accounts as being the authentic truth.

Columbus wasn't even here very long, he left and went back home. I believe it was 4 months from what I can recall.

And no he did not treat the natives here badly, he and all of his crew on all ships would have been slaughtered. They were not an army or combat troops, they were explorers. In other words he never would have made it back home. Now what happened after he and the other left had nothing to do with Columbus.

Now after he left and went back home he was given other jobs to do. More or less take over for others that were doing those jobs. One can't judge on what happened that far back by todays standards. The whole world was different back then.

[VooDooChild]

Its not that its too inacurate, its just that a lot of stuff isnt taught.

Columbus is a good example. He "discovered" the new world. After one or possibly several vast migrations of first nations people, and after vikings etc.

He as far as I know never set foot in what is the U.S.
The closest he got was cuba?

So then theres a semantics issue. The problem when you learn U.S. history is its literally the history of the country and completely glosses over European exploration of the U.S. in parts of the country that werent yet territories or states. So really US history focuses on the primarily british (and protestant) history.

European exploration of the U.S. starts with the Spanish in Florida.

A lot of US people still dont realise that St. Augustine is the oldest "european" city in the US. There were also several other setlements in Florida that are nearly as old they just werent continuously occupied.

So really we should start with Ponce De Leon, then talk about the other Spanish expeditions. Like DeSoto probably did more for US exploration than anyone else at the time, but in a lot of US history textbooks they gloss over his exploration but will gladly talk about Jamestown.

You want an interesting read, look up the Narvaez expedition. Its Amazing what the survivors went through. Even just the wikipedia page description will blow your mind. And it was the first time non-native peoples traversed all the way from the East to West coast. Although since it was a failed expedition I guess it doesnt count. Its still pretty amazing. Theres a few books written about it that I keep meaning to buy. I kinda wish hollywood would do an all out epic historical movie on it.

Then theres plenty of other stuff that is probably just misunderstanding. Like the Pythagorean theorem was known a thousand years before Pythagoras was ever born.

[VooDooChild]

Just to ramble on some more.

Columbus on his later expeditions did do some not great stuff in some caribbean islands. But everyone was doing not great stuff. The Spanish coming over werent exactly here to preach peace and love.

I also think I might know what you are talking about with some of the covered up archaeologocal sites... Ill just say that anthropology and archaeology is an evidence based science. The problem there is that sometimes that evidence isnt cut and dry or agreed upon. So one side might say it goes against the mainstream, but the other side is making the argument that the evidence is insufficient.

I want to say I heard a similar story about Chinese on the West coast but when I heard it it was Japanese. Im pretty sure the evidence for this though was based only on a geneological study which isnt necessarily a garauntee.

Id love to believe that the cocaine and tobacco mummies were a product of pre-columbian trade routes, but once again, theres not enough evidence to say thats the case.

[Doc Dan]

Have any of you read Columbus' diary. There is an English translation. He was coming to a place he knew existed. His name means Light of Christ and he believed he was bringing Christ to people who did not know about him. He only argued financial gain to the king and queen because he knew he would never get permission otherwise.

As for who discovered America, the Italians/Romans knew and wrote of its existence a thousand years before Columbus. There was trade between Egypt and South America thousands of years ago, and we know this from the types of trade goods that came into Egypt that were only found in the Americas. The Chinese also traded in the Americas. The Irish fished off the coast of North America even before the Vikings came. St. Brendan later came to North America on his famous voyage, a place already known, and he stayed for a while before returning. Then, of course the Vikings actually settled in North America. Others probably did, as well.

[James Y]

Wasn’t it Columbus who first referred to the Natives of the Americas he saw as Indians, because at first he thought they had arrived in India (or the East Indies)?

Jim

[ChrisinHove]

Even “What happened ” and “when it happened” can be surprisingly difficult to ascertain with the fog of war or the passage of time.

Most History research also tries to consider “Why it happened” which is a whole lot more complicated, and probably more interesting.

[JD Spydo]

Wasn’t it Columbus who first referred to the Natives of the Americas he saw as Indians, because at first he thought they had arrived in India (or the East Indies)?

Jim

yes that is correct Jim. I've heard that from more than one teacher and at least one college professor as well. And I heard that is how Native American people got stuck with the label of "Indian". It had to be something of that ilk for them to come up with that name/label.

I had heard the main goal of Christopher Columbus journey was to find a short cut to India and other parts of that region of the globe. At least that's what the conventional history books tell us anyway and I firmly believe that is indeed the truth of the matter. Yeah I think they got that part of it right.

[JD Spydo]

Even “What happened ” and “when it happened” can be surprisingly difficult to ascertain with the fog of war or the passage of time.

Most History research also tries to consider “Why it happened” which is a whole lot more complicated, and probably more interesting.

Yeah I think you're on to something there for sure. But also don't forget that most people want a narrative that they can gain from as well. Money and greed are always factors as well.

I personally believe that most all of the world's history has a certain amount of disinformation attached to it. Finding the real truth has never been easy. Take the Civil War of the 1800s here in the USA for example. I've heard so much conflicting information about the Civil War over the years to where I really am not sure anymore. It's kind of amazing that the USA even survived that war with all things considered.

[bearfacedkiller]

Nothing human is free from bias, including history.

Sticking with just the facts doesn’t remove bias. Factual data can be framed in a way that has bias through selection or omission of certain data.

You could argue that the guillotine cures dandruff because 100% of people who faced the guillotine no longer had dandruff. There are many ways to use logical fallacies to come to incorrect conclusions.

As far as the winners writing history, that isn’t always true. I have done some research on how different countries teach WW2 history in schools for example. Germany is brutally honest with themselves about it from what I have read. Japan on the other hand, not so much.

I think history almost always favors the civilization of the author. It’s hard to deny the level of American exceptionalism we have been fed in school. We learn a lot about slavery, the displacement of indigenous peoples, the slaughter of the buffalos and we might cover the Japanese internment camps but in general we leave out a lot of our history that we are not proud of and honestly there is plenty of it.

The more common way that history is misrepresented isn’t usually a skewing of the facts but rather the omission of certain facts or events.

[JD Spydo]

Nothing human is free from bias, including history.

As far as the winners writing history, that isn’t always true. I have done some research on how different countries teach WW2 history in schools for example. Germany is brutally honest with themselves about it from what I have read. Japan on the other hand, not so much.

I think history almost always favors the civilization of the author. It’s hard to deny the level of American exceptionalism we have been fed in school. We learn a lot about slavery, the displacement of indigenous peoples, the slaughter of the buffalos and we might cover the Japanese internment camps but in general we leave out a lot of our history that we are not proud of and honestly there is plenty of it.

The more common way that history is misrepresented isn’t usually a skewing of the facts but rather the omission of certain facts or events.

Those are some great examples that you pointed out for sure. I'm mind blown as to how few people know that the US government literally put Japanese-American people into virtual prisons ( internment camps) during World War II>> and these were people that were mostly born in the USA and never had been to Japan. But they sure didn't put German-Americans into prison camps though.

That was truly disgusting from about every angle. FDR wasn't all that good of guy as my parents used to tell me he was. I've often wondered what the real truth was concerning the Pearl Harbor attack?

There is a guy I listen to on his podcast that swears that all wars are banker's wars. I'm not so sure he isn't right about that. You can use the old adage of "Follow The Money Trail" to see which way it leads. Most of the time it leads in the direction of the raw truth, which isn't always pretty.

[Doc Dan]

I had heard the main goal of Christopher Columbus journey was to find a short cut to India and other parts of that region of the globe. At least that's what the conventional history books tell us anyway and I firmly believe that is indeed the truth of the matter. Yeah I think they got that part of it right.

That's not what he actually believed. He argued that to get funding.

[JRinFL]

If you can control history, you can control the present and future. Once you understand that, you'll never accept any history as carved in stone.

[Naperville]

3 sayings that have stuck with me over the last 5 years. I've seen them hundreds of times.

- He who controls the past controls the future
- Demographics is Destiny
- To find out who is in control of the present is as easy as finding out who you may not talk about

[Ankerson]

I had heard the main goal of Christopher Columbus journey was to find a short cut to India and other parts of that region of the globe. At least that's what the conventional history books tell us anyway and I firmly believe that is indeed the truth of the matter. Yeah I think they got that part of it right.

That's not what he actually believed. He argued that to get funding.

Exactly.

It cost a lot of money back then to fund a Journey like that and with multiple ships too so he had to go to the Government to actually get it funded.

[Ankerson]

Nothing human is free from bias, including history.

As far as the winners writing history, that isn’t always true. I have done some research on how different countries teach WW2 history in schools for example. Germany is brutally honest with themselves about it from what I have read. Japan on the other hand, not so much.

I think history almost always favors the civilization of the author. It’s hard to deny the level of American exceptionalism we have been fed in school. We learn a lot about slavery, the displacement of indigenous peoples, the slaughter of the buffalos and we might cover the Japanese internment camps but in general we leave out a lot of our history that we are not proud of and honestly there is plenty of it.

The more common way that history is misrepresented isn’t usually a skewing of the facts but rather the omission of certain facts or events.

Those are some great examples that you pointed out for sure. I'm mind blown as to how few people know that the US government literally put Japanese-American people into virtual prisons ( internment camps) during World War II>> and these were people that were mostly born in the USA and never had been to Japan. But they sure didn't put German-Americans into prison camps though.

That was truly disgusting from about every angle. FDR wasn't all that good of guy as my parents used to tell me he was. I've often wondered what the real truth was concerning the Pearl Harbor attack?

There is a guy I listen to on his podcast that swears that all wars are banker's wars. I'm not so sure he isn't right about that. You can use the old adage of "Follow The Money Trail" to see which way it leads. Most of the time it leads in the direction of the raw truth, which isn't always pretty.

Well not exactly.

After Pearl Harbor they did indeed round up all the of Japanese Americans.

But for a good reason, believe it or not, it was a much different Country back then than it is now.

They did it to protect them from the people back then as most were out for blood after Pearl harbor.

The reason they didn't do the same for the German Americans is because they blend in with the rest of the people better.

Fast forward to today, ignorant idiots and morons were and are attacking Asians over a virus, that was any Asians.

And that's just a virus......

[Doc Dan]

Stupid, isn't it. Racism knows no limits to its stupidity.