History from other perspectives

[violiav]

I think i might stumble over this thought.
I've often wondered what history is like in other places. Rather, the different ways certain events are viewed. Obviously, here in America everything is America-centric. That's normal. I'm curious at to how other countries treat that same era.
How is the American revolution discussed in English classroom, for example?

[Greenday]

My friends in Florida called the American Civil War "The War of Northern Aggression". I laughed pretty hard at that one.

[Nekojin]

My friends in Florida called the American Civil War "The War of Northern Aggression". I laughed pretty hard at that one.

That's actually extremely common among Southerners who have had family in the region for generations. Even if their family wasn't actually in the South during the Revolutionary War.

[wolfie]

Back when I was a kid, I remember a TV commercial from Time Life Books (can't recall if it was for books or VHS tapes) for "an unbiased account of the Second World War". My reaction to that was "Cool - a documentary produced by Martians".

After all, WW2 was such a big thing that NOBODY from an industrial country on Earth would be completely unbiased.

[Greenday]

One of the things I've always wanted to do was travel to a few different European countries and take history classes there. I'd love to see WII from Japan's view, or Germany's, or Italy's. The American revolution from England. The War of 1812 from Canada.

[bara]

Bias in history lessons is a bane in any society. The old saying 'History is written by the winners' isnt always accurate. The way the Native Americans were treated was monstrous and was skipped over way to easily when I was in school.

A more worldly view of past events is necessary more and more as we become more connected.

[AmbrosiaWriter]

I actually took a class that was based in just that. It was called World Civilizations (it was a two semester class) and it started waaaay back during the earliest civilizations and then moved forward into most contemporary times. For all the places that we studied during different times we always had accounts and such from many different places about the same thing.

It was pretty awesome. Very eye opening.

Same concept happened when I took an Anthropology course. I do suggest people try to find a way to look into it, it's VERY enlightening.

[Rapscallion]

How is the American revolution discussed in English classroom, for example?

I think it worth noting that the UK in various forms has been around for quite a bit longer than the US. When I was in school, the revolution you refer to wasn't on the menu. I remember (poorly) doing the Normans and Saxons before realising I didn't enjoy history and dropping it like a sack of burning dog shit. Classical studies (ancient Rome and Greece etc) was far more entertaining.

See, for us it's not compulsory to learn about one particular incident in a very long timeline. I'm sure it's covered, but we only have a so much time and so much to cover, so we get a syllabus of what areas we're going to be tested on for each year in school, rather than a mandatory.

It might be the middle ages, the tudors, the normans and saxons, WW1 and 2, the victorians, the napoleonic era and so forth. We've got more history than we can conveniently learn.

I can see why it's treated with such reverence in the US as it's where you came from and well documented, but our past is a far more lengthy and murky affair. No clean formation of the nation.

Rapscallion

[Nekojin]

Well, see, the British Empire was created when a Norman warrior tried to pick up on a Saxon barmaid...

No, wait, that's the origin of the English language, not the British Empire. Never mind.

[Librarian]

Speaking from a not english, but european classroom here: we never discussed the american civil war. From dinosaurs, cavemen, egypt, greece, normans vs saxons, the romans and their influence on the world, middle ages and some of the great rulers and countries of europe in the years 1200-1800. Then on to the late 1800's and all the movements in europe to stop child labour, to world war one, interbellum and world war 2 quite extensive, but it stopped there. In history we also never learned about vietnam or korea. But we would spend quite a bit of time learning about Karolingers and Merovingers, the working class man in the late 19th century, and the origin of how countries came to be (for example from Prussia to Germany etc)

Clarify: This was over the course of 6 school-years from ages 12 to 18. (i wouldn't know the term or equivalent in english/american/... of those years, here its called "middleschool")

[Lace Neil Singer]

Exactly what Raps said. Tho I seem to have had much better history teachers as a whole, cuz I love history and always have done. XD

[crashhelmet]

Reminds me of the movie "The Beautician and the Beast." Timothy Dalton plays the "beast" and is a dictator in a small European nation. He's teaching his kids a history lesson, where he was single-handedly responsible for winning wars and bringing change to the world.

Made me wonder what it's like in real world nations like that. North Korea, for example?

[bex1218]

Thats why I do my own research outside of school.

I just recently watched a documentary on the aftermath of the Civil War. History teachers just stop after Lincoln was killed and move to World War I. The Civil War lasted a lot longer than people are taught.

[EricKei]

My friends in Florida called the American Civil War "The War of Northern Aggression". I laughed pretty hard at that one.

*shrug* While I have very seldom heard the CW referred to in that way (even from other Southerners), I can certainly understand why people down heah would see it that way Of course, it probably would have been termed something even nastier had the South won. (I do think that slavery would have died out anyway if so, it just would have taken longer. It's not like the plantation owners were the only people benefiting from it...but that's another thread for another day).

Terms used are funny like that -- there was, after all, a century or so of what was, at least to a not-insignificant extent, financial (and other) oppression of the South that is laughably referred to as "Reconstruction" after the CW. ~_~ So yes, sometimes the winners DO write the history books and get dibs on the names to be used

[daleduke17]

Thats why I do my own research outside of school.

I just recently watched a documentary on the aftermath of the Civil War. History teachers just stop after Lincoln was killed and move to World War I. The Civil War lasted a lot longer than people are taught.

We did just a quick chapter or two (lasting about two weeks) in American History about Reconstruction. World War II was about two weeks (I think) and anything after WWII was rushed through in about three days (in a "By the way Vietnam, Korea, moon landing, etc all happened. Have a great summer")