Any history buffs here?

The only p0roblem I saw at Bent's Fort (actually a fortified trading post) was the Park Service claimed it was historically accurate. The cannon they had on display representing the actual cannon did not have a touch hole.

The claim "historically accurate" can be a very slippery slope, much better to use some other expression like "historically representative".

__________________
Mess with me? I may let karma take care of it. Mess with my family? I become Karma.

No, history is like beauty, it is all in the eye of the beholder. One need to read several books on a subject for before some glimmer of the possible truth emerges. The most plausible historical description are usually written many years after the actual event and after researching a number of books on that event. Eyewitness account are usually suspect as to the complete truth as the observer probably only saw or experienced part of that event.

Everyone that writes has some sort of agenda and political leanings. They are extremely difficult, if not impossible to keep out of one's writings.

__________________
Mess with me? I may let karma take care of it. Mess with my family? I become Karma.

A personal history of a person that was completely true would say"He/she was born, he/she lived, and he/she died", that rest is open to discussion.

Names do get changed. Sometime legally other times to hid something. Even gender changes, sometimes unknowingly to others.

If you go back in time to about the time of the fall of the western Roman Empire, even dates have been translated. The Christan, Jewish and Muslim calendars all started about 1200 or so years ago. We also had the change from Julian to Georgian calendars in the 1500 to 1700 CE time frame.

Modern death certificates can be full of errors as the information (at least before computers) was given by a living friend, relative or whatever. Many errors were made due to the emotional stress involved. I like to call these errors - Errors of Bereavement.

__________________
Mess with me? I may let karma take care of it. Mess with my family? I become Karma.

Could be. If I find out, I will post it. She traveled with no warm clothes, through briars and streams. No food, had to eat grubs!! Only to not be welcomed home by neighbors. Well, I won't tell anymore but she did have a companion for awhile. Part of her travels was through the WV mountains.

Several years ago, my Mother asked us to go to a nearby County to look up the graves of her grandparents for her. So on a nice Sunday we took the camera and traveled to Newburg, WV and found the cemetery. We could not believe how many people had died in 1918! Even the 15 year old first wife of her grandfather! Funny, no one in the family knew about her. At the time, being unaware of the flu epidemic we were stunned! Jklady

Thanks, Pauline! Now I won't have to wrack my brain. Didn't you just feel it when you were reading the story? We had some folks up here that wanted to try to retrace her steps. Jklady

One of my favorites is "History of the Canal System of the State of New York" by Noble E. Whitford http://www.history.rochester.edu/can.../Contents.html

As for accuracy or truth in these books, I am not necessarily talking about dates, names, even gender, or maybe even places.

The thing that I wonder about is the overall leaning of a book. In other words, I would bet a writer of history who wrote about the Civil War from the South would write a very different story than those from the North. I mean from a political, sociological stance. Of course, the experience was different - but I mean in the ideas they are intending to bring out - and yet, both could be substantially correct.

It would depend on what happenings they would choose to include in their writings as to the picture one would take away with them.

I would truly like to find out more about Israel, but if you only read books written by people who saw things one way or want to present one side, then you might come to the wrong conclusion. If you read both, you would probably just be confused.

It is just something I never thought about until I realized my kids history was not the history I studied -

Not to put a pall on the thread - just wondered if anyone else had thought of that. I read for enjoyment, but if I read non-fiction, I want to learn something as well.

You also have to remember those that win the war write the history, so take what history you read with a grain of salt and check the facts against another source if you plan on relaying those facts to others.

I remember covering this in grade school, I wish I could find the paintings my book then used to illustrate the point.

They were paintings of the Boston Massacre, one by a Brit and one by an American. In one, there was a solid group of soldiers standing away from a crowd of people, firing into it as the poor protesters fled in terror. The other showed six or so soldiers in the middle of a howling, armed mob, struggling to defend themselves.

Thanks everyone.

Actually, I did know that all slaves were not freed. If I remember correctly, it actually names the places, down to specific counties, where the slaves were freed - the rest being union held territory.

Nothing political there - just not something we were taught - I realized it when I read it.

Yes, the victors get to write the history --------

We never studied anything about differences in history, I'll have to ask my kids if they did. Of course, I went to school in the dark ages 40-50's.

This is just something I have been thinking about since I have lived through some history in this country and am amazed at some people's ideas of the times and in some cases those ideas are being taught in school.

My daughter came home from college one night to tell me how sorry she was that I didn't get to go to college because there were no colleges that admitted women in the 50's!!!!!!!!! Just think of the many teachers who will think this is the truth. Of course, they could dig around and find the truth, some will and some won't.

Just makes you wonder about history in general.

I would bet that there is vast dofference on who "won the war of 1812".
Depending if you learned your history in the U.S. or in Canada.
Couple of you guys/gals are from Canada, right, so who won the war?

According to the Wikipedia:

The proclamation made the end of slavery a central goal of the war (along with restoring the Union) and was highly controversial in the North. It was not a law passed by Congress but a presidential order empowered, Lincoln knew, by his position as "Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy" under Article II, section 2 of the United States Constitution. It first affected only those slaves that had already escaped to the Union side, but as the Union armies conquered the south, thousands of slaves were freed each day until nearly all (estimated at 4 million) were free by the summer of 1865. Some slavery continued to exist in the border states until the entire institution was finally wiped out by the ratification of the Thirteenth Amendment on December 6, 1865.

__________________

Speaking of history, this is a COOL site to browse:

http://teachpol.tcnj.edu/amer_pol_hist/_browse.htm

__________________

First off, please don't take it personally, this is not meant to be mean or critize(sp) you or anyone else.
Please read the Emancipation Proclamation
Emancipation Proclamation
Second, please take wikipedia references with a grain of salt. They do contain alot of false information and be aware that any one can go to the site and edit any info they choose. I could go there right now and edit the page on "The first man on the moon" and change the date to 1869 instead of 1969, people would then spout it as truth and history.

Your assumption that the slaves escaped to the North to be free is wrong. Why would they go north when the EP didn't free them if in Union held territory. Also border States like Maryland still had slave till the ratification of the 13th Admendment. I have seen accounts where Union officers sent slaves to Confederate held territories just so they would be free.
I guess in short all I'm saying is don't believe the first thing you read, always check the sources. If possible check the originals or verified copies of the originals. Sites like wikipedia are full of mistakes, or flat out false information.
History tends to be written after the fact and by those that were not there and from the writers particular point of view, be it good or bad is up to the reader to decide.

Have read it. I was always good in history, still am.


Which is why I very seldom stay on a wikipedia page. I read it and then go googling for details. I do find some mistakes in some of the wiki articles, they are *usually* pretty accurate, just not enough details.


I didn't assume anything. I just posted a link and an excerpt and said "according to..."


I often spend hours checking out the sources. After posting my link in this topic, I spent the rest of the night buried in history sites. I have a problem. I check out one link, which leads to another and then another and then another.....

I'll have google open (sometimes more than 1 google tab), and numerous sites all at once open to something I'm researching. I overwhelm myself sometimes!


Yep!

__________________

This post came to mind this morning when one of my kids was talking about their school work (I home school). They mentioned that they were enjoying that particular part of their science because it was talking about people doing stuff (it was about the space race). My kids LOVE history! I hated it in school because it was so boring but have enjoyed it so much as an adult because it isn't dates forced down your throat. My kids get their history from historical novels, historical fiction, biographies, from history videos, library history books, the kinds of books you guys are talking about here. They make connections that often amaze me. We were in Washington, DC this spring at an air and space museum and DD looked at a plane and told me what president was in office at that time! When history is learned in context or as part of a story line it takes on so much more meaning!

[QUOTE=Explorer]Perhaps. Many think it was murder made to look like suicide. He was Governor to Louisiana and traveling back to Washington on business. He died in TN at a road side inn.


He suffered greatly from depression. His journals show a man who
fought with depression almost daily. Some days he couldn't even
bring himself to get out of his tent. All the more reason to respect
him for his accomplishments.
jim

__________________
"These capitalists generally act harmoniously and in concert, to fleece the people..."
Abraham Lincoln, from his first speech as an Illinois state legislator, 1837

This is so true! If anyone wants to read a history from a working-class
viewpoint, I highly recommend "A Peoples History of The US" by Howard
Zinn. You'll never look at things in quite thye same way again.
jim

__________________
"These capitalists generally act harmoniously and in concert, to fleece the people..."
Abraham Lincoln, from his first speech as an Illinois state legislator, 1837