Leif erikson pool sioux city

Dedicated to all American history teachers who teach against their textbooks

Contents

Acknowledgments ix

Introduction: Something Has Gone Very Wrong

1 • Handicapped by History; The Process of Hero-making 9

2 * 1493: The True Importance of Christopher Columbus 29

3 • The Truth about the First Thanksgiving 67

4 • Red Eyes 91

5 • "Gone with the Wind":

The Invisibility of Racism in American History Textbooks 131

6 • John Brown and Abraham Lincoln:

The Invisibility of Anti-racism in American History Textbooks 165

7 • The Land of Opportunity 195

8 • Watching Big Brother:

What Textbooks Teach about the Federal Government 209

9 • Down the Memory Hole: The Disappearance of the Recent Past 233

10 • Progress Is Our Most Important Product 249

11 * Why Is History Taught Like This? 265

12 • What Is the Result of Teaching History Like This? 293

Afterword: The Future Lies Ahead—and What to Do about Them 307

Notes 313

Appendix 365

Index 366

V I I

Acknowledgments

The people listed below, in alphabetical order, talked with me, commented on

chapters, suggested sources, corrected my mistakes, or provided other moral or

material aid. I thank them very much. They are: Ken Ames, Charles Arnaude,

Stephen Aron, Jose Barreiro, Carol Berkin, Sanford Berman, Robert Bieder, Bill

Bigelow, Michael Blakey, James Baker, Linda Brew, Tim Brookes, Josh Brown,

Lonnie Bunch, Vernon Burton, Claire Cuddy, Richard N. Current, Pete Daniel,

Kevin Dann, Martha Day, Margo Del Vecchio, Susan Dixon, Ariel Dorfman,

Mary Dyer, Shirley Engel, Bill Evans, John Fadden, Patrick Ferguson, Paul

Finkelman, Frances FitzGerald, William Fitzhugh, John Franklin, Michael Frisch,

Mel Gabler, James Gardiner, John Garraty, Elise Guyette, Mary E. Haas, Patrick

Hagopian, William Haviland, Gordon Henderson, Richard Hill, Mark Hilgen-

dorf, Mark Hirsch, Dean Hoge, Jo Hoge, Jeanne Houck, Frederick Hoxie, David

Hutchinson, Carolyn Jackson, Clifton H. Johnson, Elizabeth Judge, Stuart

Kaufman, David Kelley, Roger Kennedy, Paul Kleppner, J. Morgan Kousser,

Gary Kulik, Jill Laramie, Ken Lawrence, Mary Lehman, Steve Lewin, Caret Liv-

ermore, Lucy Loewen, Nick Loewen, Barbara M. Loste, Mark Lytle, John Mar-

ciano, J. Dan Marshall, Juan Mauro, Edith Mayo, James McPherson, Dennis

Meadows, Donella Meadows, Dennis Medina, Betty Meggars, Milton Meltzer,

Deborah Menkart, Donna Morgenstern, Nanepashemet, Janet Noble, Jeff

Nygaard, Jim O'Brien, Roger Norland, Wardell Payne, Mark Pendergrast, Larry

Pizer, Bernice Reagan, Ellen Reeves, Joe Reidy Roy Rozensweig, Harry Ruben-

stein, Faith Davis Ruffins, John Salter, John Anthony Scott, Saul Schniderman,

Barry Schwartz, Louis Segal, Ruth Selig, Betty Sharpe, Brian Sherman, David

Shiman, Beatrice Siegel, Barabara Clark Smith, Luther Spoehr, Jerold Starr,

Mark Stoler, Bill Sturtevant, Lonn Taylor, Linda Tucker, Harriet Tyson, Ivan von

Sertima, Herman Viola, Virgil J. Vogel, Debbie Warner, Barbara Woods, Nancy

Wright, and John Yewell.

Three institutions helped materially. The Smithsonian Institution awarded

me two senior postdoctoral fellowships. Members of its staff provided lively

IX

intellectual stimulation, as did my fellow fellows at the National Museum of

American History. Interns at the Smithsonian from the University of Michigan,

Johns Hopkins, and especially Portland State University chased down errant

facts. Second, the flexible University of Vermont allowed me to go on leave to

work on this book, including a sabbatical leave in 1993. Finally, The New

Press, Andre Schiffrin, and especially my editor, Diane Wachtell, provided con-

sistent encouragement and intelligent criticism.

A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S

It would be better not to know so many things than to know so many things that

are not so.

—Felix Okoye1

American history is longer, larger, more various, more beautiful, and more terrible

than anything anyone has ever said about It.

—James Baldwin2

Concealment of the historical truth is a crime against the people.

—Gen. Petro G. Grigorenko, samizdat letter

to a history journal, c. 1975, USSR3

Those who don't remember the past are condemned to repeat the eleventh grade.

—James W. Loewen

Introduction:

Something Has Gone Very Wrong

H igh school students hate history. When they list their favorite subjects, his-tory invariably comes in last. Students consider history "the most irrelevant" of twenty-one subjects commonly taught in high school. Bor-r-rtng is the adjec-

tive they apply to it. When students can, they avoid it, even though most stu-

dents get higher grades in history than in math, science, or English.4 Even when

they are forced to take classes in history, they repress what they learn, so every

year or two another study decries what our seventeen-year-olds don't know.5

African American, Native American, and Latino students view history with

a special dislike. They also learn history especially poorly. Students of color do

only slightly worse than white students in mathematics. If you'll pardon my

grammar, non-white students do more worse in English and most worse in

history.6 Something intriguing is going on here: surely history is not more diffi-

cult for minorities than trigonometry or Faulkner. Students don't even know they

are alienated, only that they "don't like social studies" or "aren't any good at his-

tory." In college, most students of color give history departments a wide berth.

Many history teachers perceive the low morale in their classrooms. If they

have a lot of time, light domestic responsibilities, sufficient resources, and a flex-

ible principal, some teachers respond by abandoning the overstuffed textbooks

and reinventing their American history courses. All too many teachers grow dis-

heartened and settle for less. At least dimly aware that their students are not

requiting their own love of history, these teachers withdraw some of their

energy from their courses. Gradually they end up going through the motions,

staying ahead of their students in the textbooks, covering only material that will

appear on the next test.

College teachers in most disciplines are happy when their students have

had significant exposure to the subject before college. Not teachers in history.

History professors in college routinely put down high school history courses. A

colleague of mine calls his survey of American history "Iconoclasm I and II,"

because he sees his job as disabusing his charges of what they learned in high

school. In no other field does this happen. Mathematics professors, for instance,

know that non-Euclidean geometry is rarely taught in high school, but they

don't assume that Euclidean geometry was mis taught. Professors of English litera-

ture don't presume that Romeo and Juliet was misunderstood in high school.

Indeed, history is the only field in which the more courses students take, the

stupider they become.

Perhaps I do not need to convince you that American history is impor-

tant. More than any other topic, it is about us. Whether one deems our present

society wondrous or awful or both, history reveals how we arrived at this point.

Understanding our past is central to our ability to understand ourselves and the

world around us. We need to know our history, and according to C. Wright

Mills, we know we da7

Outside of school, Americans show great interest in history. Historical

novels, whether by Gore Vidal (Lincoln, Burr, et al.) or Dana Fuller Ross (Idaho!,

Utah!, Nebraska!, Oregon!, Missouri.', and on! and on!) often become bestsellers.

The National Museum of American History is one of the three big draws of the

Smithsonian Institution. The series "The Civil War" attracted new audiences to

public television. Movies based on historical incidents or themes are a contin-

uing source of fascination, from Birth of a Nation through Gone with the Wind to

Dances with Wolves and JFK.

Our situation is this: American history is full of fantastic and important

stories. These stories have the power to spellbind audiences, even audiences of

difficult seventh-graders. These same stories show what America has been about

and are directly relevant to our present society. American audiences, even young

ones, need and want to know about their national past. Yet they sleep through

the classes that present it.

What has gone wrong?

We begin to get a handle on this question by noting that the teaching of

history, more than any other discipline, is dominated by textbooks.8 And stu-

dents are right: the books are boring." The stories that history textbooks tell are

predictable; every problem has already been solved or is about to be solved.

Textbooks exclude conflict or real suspense. They leave out anything that might

reflect badly upon our national character. When they try for drama, they achieve

only melodrama, because readers know that everything will turn out fine in the

end. "Despite setbacks, the United States overcame these challenges," in the

words of one textbook. Most authors of history textbooks don't even try for

melodrama. Instead, they write in a tone that if heard aloud might be described

as "mumbling lecturer." No wonder students lose interest.

2 • L I E S MY T E A C H E R T O L D ME

Textbooks almost never use the present to illuminate the past. They might

ask students to consider gender roles in contemporary society as a means of

prompting students to think about what women did and did not achieve in the

suffrage movement or in the more recent women's movement. They might ask

students to prepare household budgets for the families of a janitor and a stock-

broker as a means of prompting thinking about labor unions and social classes

in the past and present. They might, but they don't. The present is not a source

of information for writers of history textbooks.

Conversely, textbooks seldom use the past to illuminate the present. They

portray the past as a simple-minded morality play. "Be a good citizen" is the

message that textbooks extract from the past. "You have a proud heritage. Be all

that you can be. After all, look at what the United States has accomplished."

While there is nothing wrong with optimism, it can become something of a

burden for students of color, children of working-class parents, girls who notice

the dearth of female historical figures, or members of any group that has not

achieved socio-economic success. The optimistic approach prevents any under-

standing of failure other than blaming the victim. No wonder children of color

are alienated. Even for male children from affluent white families, bland opti-

mism gets pretty boring after eight hundred pages.

Textbooks in American history stand in sharp contrast to other teaching

materials. Why are history textbooks so bad? Nationalism is one of the culprits.

Textbooks are often muddled by the conflicting desires to promote inquiry and

to indoctrinate blind patriotism. "Take a look in your history book, and you'll

see why we should be proud," goes an anthem often sung by high school glee

clubs. But we need not even look inside.10 The titles themselves tell the story:

The Great Republic, The American Way, Land of Promise, Rise the American Nation.11

Such titles differ from the titles of all other textbooks students read in high

school or college. Chemistry books, for example, are called Chemistry or Princi-

ples of Chemistry, not Rise of the Molecule. And you can tell history textbooks just

from their covers, graced as they are with American flags, bald eagles, the Statue

of Liberty.

Between the glossy covers, American history textbooks are full of informa-

tion—-overly full. These books are huge. The specimens in my collection of a

dozen of the most popular textbooks average four and a half pounds in weight

and 888 pages in length. No publisher wants to lose an adoption because a book

has left out a detail of concern to a particular geographical area or a particular

group. Textbook authors seem compelled to include a paragraph about every U.S.

president, even Chester A. Arthur and Millard Fillmore. Then there are the

I N T R O D U C T I O N - 3

review pages at the end of each chapter. Land of Promise, to take one example,

enumerates 444 chapter-closing "Main Ideas." In addition, the book lists literally

thousands of "Skill Activities," "Key Terms," "Matching" items, "Fill in the

Blanks," "Thinking Critically" questions, and "Review Identifications," as well as

still more "Main Ideas" at the ends of the various sections within each chapter. At

year's end, no student can remember 444 main ideas, not to mention 624 key

terms and countless other "factoids." So students and teachers fall back on one

main idea: to memorize the terms for the test following each chapter, then forget

them to clear the synapses for the next chapter. No wonder so many high school

graduates cannot remember in which century the Civil War was fought!12

None of the facts is remembered, because they are presented simply as

one damn thing after another. While textbook authors tend to include most of

the trees and all too many twigs, they neglect to give readers even a glimpse of

what they might find memorable: the forests. Textbooks stifle meaning by sup-

pressing causation. Students exit history textbooks without having developed

the ability to think coherently about social Life.

Even though the books bulge with detail, even though the courses are so

busy they rarely reach I960, our teachers and our textbooks still leave out most

of what we need to know about the American past. Some of the factoids they

present are flatly wrong or unverifiable. In sum, startling errors of omission and

distortion mar American histories.

Errors in history textbooks often go uncorrected, partly because the his-

tory profession does not bother to review textbooks. Occasionally outsiders do:

Frances FitzGerald's 1979 study, America Revised, was a bestseller, but it made no

impact on the industry. In pointing out how textbooks ignored or distorted the

Spanish impact on Latin America and the colonial United States, FitzGerald pre-

dicted, "Text publishers may now be on the verge of rewriting history." But she

was wrong—the books have not changed.13

History can be imagined as a pyramid. At its base are the millions of pri-

mary sources—the plantation records, city directories, speeches, songs, pho-

tographs, newspaper articles, diaries, and letters that document times past. Based

on these primary materials, historians write secondary works—books and arti-

cles on subjects ranging from daftness on Martha's Vineyard to Grant's tactics at

Vicksburg. Historians produce hundreds of these works every year, many of

them splendid. In theory, a few historians, working individually or in teams,

then synthesize the secondary literature into tertiary works—textbooks covering

all phases of U.S. history.

L I E S M Y T E A C H E R T O L D M E

In practice, however, it doesn't happen that way. Instead, history text-

books are clones of each other. The first thing editors do when recruiting new

authors is to send them a half-dozen examples of the competition. Often a text-

book is written not by the authors whose names grace its cover, but by minions

deep in the bowels of the publisher's offices. When historians do write text-

books, they risk snickers from their colleagues—-tinged with envy, but snickers

nonetheless: "Why are you devoting time to pedagogy rather than original

research?"

The result is not happy for textbook scholarship. Many history textbooks

list up-to-the-minute secondary sources in their bibliographies, yet the narratives

remain totally traditional—unaffected by recent research.'4

What would we think of a course in poetry in which students never read

a poem? The editors' voice in an English literature textbook might be as dull as

the voice in a history textbook, but at lease in the English textbook the voice

stills when the book presents original works of literature. The omniscient nar-

rator's voice of history textbooks insulates students from the raw materials of

history. Rarely do authors quote speeches, songs, diaries, or letters. Students

need not be protected from this material. They can just as well read one para-

graph from William Jennings Bryan's "Cross of Gold" speech as read American

Adventures's two paragraphs about it.

Textbooks also keep students in the dark about the nature of history. His-

tory is furious debate informed by evidence and reason. Textbooks encourage

students to believe that history is facts to be learned. "We have not avoided con-

troversial issues," announces one set of textbook authors; "instead, we have tried

to offer reasoned judgments" on them—thus removing the controversy! Because

textbooks employ such a godlike tone, it never occurs to most students to ques-

tion them. "In retrospect I ask myself, why didn't I think to ask, for example,

who were the original inhabitants of the Americas, what was their life like, and

how did it change when Columbus arrived," wrote a student of mine in 1991.

"However, back then everything was presented as if it were the full picture," she

continued, "so ] never thought to doubt that it was."

As a result of all this, most high school seniors are hamstrung in their

efforts to analyze controversial issues in our society. (I know because I encounter

these students the next year as college freshmen.) We've got to do better. Five-

sixths of all Americans never take a course in American history beyond high

school. What our citizens "learn" in high school forms much of what they know

about our past.

I N T R O D U C T I O N

This book includes ten chapters of amazing stories—some wonderful, some ghastly—in American history. Arranged in roughly chronological order, these chapters do not relate mere details but events and processes with impor-

tant consequences. Yet most textbooks leave out or distort these events and processes. 1 know, because for several years I have been lugging around twelve textbooks, taking them seriously as works of history and ideology, studying what they say and don't say, and trying to figure out why. I chose the twelve as representing the range of textbooks available for American history courses.

Two of the books, Discovering American History and The American Adventure, are "inquiry textbooks" composed of maps, illustrations, and extracts from pri- mary sources such as diaries and laws, all woven together by an overarching

narrative. These books are supposed to invite students to "do" history themselves. The American Way, Land of Promise, The Untied States—A History of the

Republic, American History, and The American Tradition are traditional high school narrative history textbooks. American Adventures, Life and Liberty, and The

Challenge of Freedom are intended for junior high students but are often used by "slow" senior high classes. Triumph of the American Nation and The American

Pageant are used on college campuses as well as in high schools.'^ These twelve textbooks, which are listed (with full citations) in the appendix, have

been my window into the world of what high school students carry home, read, memorize, and forget. In addition, I have spent many hours observing high school history classes in Mississippi, Vermont, and the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area, and more hours interviewing high school history teachers.

Chapter Eleven analyzes the process of textbook creation and adoption in an attempt to explain what causes textbooks to be as bad as they are. I must confess an interest here: 1 once co-wrote a history textbook. Mississippi: Conflict and Change was the first revisionist state history textbook in America. Although the book won the Lillian Smith Award for "best non-fiction about the South" in

1975, Mississippi rejected it for use in public schools. In turn, three local school systems, my coauthor, and 1 sued the state textbook board. In April 1980 Loewn et a/, v. Turnip seed el al. resulted in a sweeping victory on the basis of the First

and Fourteenth Amendments. The experience taught me firsthand more than most writers or publishers would ever want to know about the textbook adop-

tion process. I also learned that not all the blame can be laid at the doorstep of the adoption agencies.

Chapter Twelve looks at the effects of using standard American history textbooks. It shows that the books actually make students stupid. Finally, an

LIES MY TEACHER TOLD ME

afterword cites distortions and omissions undiscussed in earlier chapters and rec-

ommends ways that teachers can teach and students can learn American history

more honestly. It is offered as an inoculation program of sorts against the future

lies we are otherwise sure to encounter.

What passes for identity in America is a series of myths about one's heroic ancestors.

—James Baldwin1

One is astonished in the study of history at the recurrence of the idea that evil must be forgotten, distorted, skimmed over. We must not remember that Daniel Webster got drunk but only remember that he was a splendid constitutional

lawyer. We must forget that George Washington was a slave owner . . . and simply remember the things we regard as creditable and inspiring. The difficulty. Of

course, with this philosophy is that history loses its value as an incentive and example; it paints perfect men and noble nations, but it does not tell the truth.

—W. E. 6. Du Bois2

By idolizing those whom we honor, we do a disservice both to them and to our- selves. ... We fail to recognize that we could go and do likewise.

—Charles V. Willie3

1. Handicapped by History:

The Process of Hero-making

This chapter is about heroification, a degenerative process (much like calcifi-cation) that makes people over into heroes. Through this process, our educa- tional media turn flesh-and-blood individuals into pious, perfect creatures

without conflicts, pain, credibility, or human interest.

Many American history textbooks are studded with biographical vignettes

of the very famous (Land of Promise devotes a box to each president) and the

famous (The Challenge of Freedom provides "Did You Know?" boxes about Eliza-

beth Blackwell, the first woman to graduate from medical school in the United

States, and Lorraine Hansberry, author of A Raisin in the Sun, among many

others). In themselves, vignettes are not a bad idea. They instruct by human

example. They show diverse ways that people can make a difference. They allow

textbooks to give space to characters such as Blackwell and Hansberry, who

relieve what would otherwise be a monolithic parade of white male political

leaders. Biographical vignettes also provoke reflection as to our purpose in

teaching history: Is Chester A. Arthur more deserving of space than, say, Frank

Lloyd Wright? Who influences us more today—Wright, who invented the car-

port and transformed domestic architectural spaces, or Arthur, who, um, signed

the first Civil Service Act? Whose rise to prominence provides more drama—

Blackwell's or George Bush's (the latter born with a silver Senate seat in his

mouth)? The choices are debatable, but surely textbooks should include some

people based not only on what they achieved but also on the distance they tra-

versed to achieve it.

We could go on to third- and fourth-guess the list of heroes in textbook

pantheons. My concern here, however, is not who gets chosen, but rather what

happens to the heroes when they are introduced into our history textbooks and

our classrooms. Two twentieth-century Americans provide case studies of hero-

ification: Woodrow Wilson and Helen Keller. Wilson was unarguably an impor-

tant president, and he receives extensive textbook coverage. Keller, on the other

hand, was a "little person" who pushed through no legislation, changed the

course of no scientific discipline, declared no war. Only one of the twelve his-

tory textbooks I surveyed includes her photograph. But teachers love to talk

about Keller and often show audiovisual materials or recommend biographies

that present her life as exemplary. All this attention ensures that students retain

something about both of these historical figures, but they may be no better off

for it. Heroification so distorts the lives of Keller and Wilson (and many others)

that we cannot think straight about them.

Teachers have held up Helen Keller, the blind and deaf girl who overcame

her physical handicaps, as an inspiration to generations of schoolchildren. Every

fifth-grader knows the scene in which Anne Sullivan spells water into young

Helen's hand at the pump. At least a dozen movies and filmstrips have been

made on Keller's life. Each yields its version of the same cliche. A McGraw-Hill

educational film concludes; "The gift of Helen Keller and Anne Sullivan to the

world is to constantly remind us of the wonder of the world around us and how

much we owe those who taught us what it means, for there is no person that is

unworthy or incapable of being helped, and the greatest service any person can

make us is to help another reach true potential."4

To draw such a bland maxim from the life of Helen Keller, historians and

filmmakers have disregarded her actual biography and left out the lessons she

specifically asked us to learn from it. Keller, who struggled so valiantly to learn

to speak, has been made mute by history. The result is that we really don't know

much about her.

Over the past ten years, 1 have asked dozens of college students who

Helen Keller was and what she did. They all know that she was a blind and deaf

girl. Most of them know that she was befriended by a teacher, Anne Sullivan,

and learned to read and write and even to speak. Some students can recall rather

minute details of Keller's early life: that she lived in Alabama, that she was

unruly and without manners before Sullivan came along, and so forth. A few

know that Keller graduated from college. But about what happened next, about

the whole of her adult life, they are ignorant. A few students venture that Keller

became a "public figure" or a "humanitarian," perhaps on behalf of the blind or

deaf. "She wrote, didn't she?" or "she spoke"—conjectures without content.

Keller, who was born in 1880, graduated from Radcliffe in 1904 and died in

1968. To ignore the sixty-four years of her adult life or to encapsulate them

with the single word humanitarian is to lie by omission.

The truth is that Helen Keller was a radical socialist. She joined the

Socialist parry of Massachusetts in 1909. She had become a social radical even

before she graduated from Radcliffe, and not, she emphasized, because of any

10 • L I E S MY T E A C H E R T O L D ME

teachings available there. After the Russian Revolution, she sang the praises of

the new communist nation: "In the East a new star is risen! With pain and

anguish the old order has given birth to the new, and behold in the East a man-

child is born! Onward, comrades, all together! Onward to the campfires of

Russia! Onward to the coming dawn!"' Keller hung a red flag over the desk in

her study. Gradually she moved to the left of the Socialist party and became a

Wobbly, a member of the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), the syndi-

calist union persecuted by Woodrow Wilson.

Keller's commitment to socialism stemmed from her experience as a dis-

abled person and from her sympathy for others with handicaps. She began by

working to simplify the alphabet for the blind, but soon came to realize that to

deal solely with blindness was to treat symptom, not cause. Through research

she learned that blindness was not distributed randomly throughout the popula-

tion but was concentrated in the lower class. Men who were poor might be

blinded in industrial accidents or by inadequate medical care; poor women who

became prostitutes faced the additional danger of syphilitic blindness. Thus

Always a voice for the voiceless. Helen Keller championed women's suffrage. Her posi- tion at the head of this 1912 demonstration shows her celebrity status as well as her commitment to the cause. The shields are all from Western states, where women were already voting.

H A N D I C A P P E D B Y H I S T O R Y • I I

12 - L IES MY T E A C H E R T O L D ME

Keller learned how the social class system controls people's opportunities in life,

sometimes determining even whether they can see. Keller's research was not just

book-learn Ing; "I have visited sweatshops, factories, crowded slums. If I could

not see it, I could smell i t . " A t the time Keller became a socialist, she was one of the most famous