Well put, James, clear and concise. --Tom GIlmore

On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 1:13 AM, James Brothers <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Anne
>
> No one can never totally trust history. As more is discovered, it changes.
> While the big picture remains, the details can alter subtly, or
> dramatically. It is an axiom that in an oral tradition, after three
> generations, then your people have always done it. There are numerous cases
> where this can be documented. For instance the Plains Indians always hunted
> on horseback. Except they couldn't until after the Spanish reintroduced the
> horse (it having gone extinct a couple of million years ago in the
> Americas). The Navajo will tell you they have always woven rugs, except that
> many of the patterns and the sheep were introduced by the Spanish (go to
> Chimayo, NM). A number of the pottery types sold by Pueblo Indians and other
> tribes while often traditional shapes were not made for a considerable time
> and were reintroduced by archaeologists.
>
> One of the things I like about science is that it is not about TRUTH.
> Because new discoveries keep changing what we know. I am endlessly amused by
> the fact that almost everything I was taught about the human family tree in
> college was wrong.
>
> The same is true about history, but to a lesser degree. For the most part
> we can trust account books, maps, plats, and diaries (and similar documents)
> to describe what actually happened. A diary is personal, there is no
> compelling reason to lie. And while survey techniques left something to be
> desired (just where is that white oak again), the rough outlines are
> accurate and the list of neighbors as well. One can look at numerous sources
> who discuss the same "happening" and it is possible to ferret out most of
> the truth of what actually took place.
>
> No one is a totally unbiased observer. And in some cases it is impossible
> for people who took part to produce a good picture of what happened. But put
> together a number of first person narratives and you get awfully close. If I
> remember correctly, when the Royal Navy sought an author to write the
> definitive history of the naval part of the War of 1812, American Theatre,
> they finally turned to Teddy Roosevelt. British authors just could not deal
> with the fact of the Wasp, Hornet, Constitution, Gen. Armstrong, or Thomas
> Boyle. So they turned to an American.
>
> As the science of archaeology progresses there are things we KNOW about the
> past. We now have the ability to pretty much tie down what was eaten and by
> whom. The same is true of things like what they ate off and using what, if
> any, utensils. Certain things we do know from history. Where it can be shown
> that there are a number of independent sources that essentially say the same
> thing about the same occurrence, we can be pretty sure that is what
> happened. Some quotes (including whole speeches) are known. It is only
> recently that politicians came up with the idea of not giving the speeches,
> just having them published as if they were delivered on the floor of the US
> House or Senate. Don't know if other countries have a similar system, but it
> would not surprise me.
>
> The importance of Columbus was he was the first European to make a
> difference. Leif Ericson or St Columba may have been earlier, but they made
> no lasting impression on the Americas. The very limited NOrse colony (ies)
> were of short duration and abandoned. They became part of the sagas, but
> that was it. After Columbus came Pizzaro, Cortez, Smith, The Pilgrims, etc.
> That is why Columbus is important.
>
> If you want TRUTH go to church.
>
> One of the things I discovered over and over while writing my MA for
> William and Mary, was that everything I knew was wrong. It was all a matter
> of digging deep enough to find the original sources.
>
> On Oct 21, 2008, at 12:18 AM, Anne Pemberton wrote:
>
>  James,
>>
>> But if we cannot trust what is a mere 200 years old, written or not, how
>> can we trust history that goes back thousands of years? Is there any history
>> we can rely on as "factual", or is it all just one big whopping guestimate?
>> After all if Columbus wasn't the first, and wasn't even the first Americans,
>> and didn't discover anything more than an island he thought was near Japan,
>> what can we believe in anymore? And Fourteen Ninety Two rhymed so well with
>> Sailed the Ocean Blue ......
>>
>> Anne
>> Anne Pemberton
>> [log in to unmask]
>> http://www.erols.com/apembert
>> http://www.educationalsynthesis.org
>> ______________________________________
>> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions
>> at
>> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
>>
>
> ______________________________________
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
>

______________________________________
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html