Week 1 -  Getting started; Why
Study History and Philosophy?

Lesson Overview

"You might be thinking,""A history class.....why me? What have I done?"" Before you regret signing up for a dusty old history class taught by a dusty old professor, consider that you might learn a little about how we got to where we are in agricultural and extension education. This is our first week, and we will ease into our history study. Please consider the following objectives, do the reading, answer the""Q&A" blog post, and call it a week."You might be thinking, "A history class.....why me? What have I done?!" Before you regret signing up for a dusty old history class taught by a dusty old professor, consider that you might learn a little about how we got to where we are in agricultural and extension education.

Objectives

By the end of this lesson, you will be able to:

1. Recite the essential parts of the syllabus.

2. Explain why the study of history is essential.

3. Demonstrate herculean willpower to dedicate time and effort to this class each week.

The Lesson/Learning Activities

Consider the above portrait by John Vanderlyn. (Landing of Columbus, by John Vanderlyn. Image in the public domain.)

It portrays the landing of Columbus in the West Indies. He is portrayed planting the flag of Ferdinand and Isabella on behalf of Spain. The date is October 12, 1492. The image is very detailed, showing Nina, Pinta, and Santa Maria in the harbor, with soldiers and sailors exploring the area. Did you happen to notice the natives in the far right-hand corner, in the shadows?

I'm sure we can call this an original painting by John Vanderlyn, but the image is not original. Many painters back in that period painted something very similar to this. They almost always show Columbus in the center, soldiers and sailors around him, and ships in the bay. Almost every other portrait of this event shows the natives on the far right side in the shadows. I think this one is particularly interesting because the natives appear to be afraid, restless, and quite anxious. History tells us that they had every right to be.

I'm drawn to this particular portrait because, in elementary school, I learned that" in 1492, Columbus sailed the ocean blue." He discovered America. Before Columbus arrived, it was assumed that people did not know anything about the existence of the North American continent. Back then, people believed it was possible to sail off the edge of the Earth."I'm drawn to this particular portrait because, in elementary school, I learned that "in 1492, Columbus sailed the ocean blue." He discovered America. Before Columbus arrived, it was assumed that people did not know anything about the existence of the North American continent. Back then, people believed it was possible to sail off the edge of the Earth.

In elementary school, I learned that Columbus discovered America. If that is true, then it must have come as one heck of a shock to the 50 million inhabitants of the North American continent already here by the time Columbus arrived in 1492. When Columbus arrived, the inhabitants here must have been considerably shocked to find out that they were lost!

The first agricultural educators in North America did not speak English or Spanish, and through 50,000 years of trial and error, they managed to earn the distinction of being the very first educators and scientists here.

So, sometimes history helps us fill in the blanks of our knowledge and think critically about the past.

While we are at it, consider this above image too.

This is an image of a monument placed in lower Manhattan by the good people of the Netherlands. It depicts the Dutch purchase of the island of Manhattan from the natives. You may have heard the story in school about how the Dutch came in and purchased Manhattan for around $24 worth of beads and other trinkets. In today's dollars, that would be about $1,000.

While I don't dispute that this happened, I think that this lovely statue that the people of the Netherlands gave us certainly misses the mark. First, depending upon the season, you're going to have one very cold Native American and one comfortable Dutch explorer, or you're going to have one very hot Dutch explorer and one comfortable Native American.

In my brief and narrow research of this particular event, I believe the statue does not depict a Native American of the New England region. The native standing there really looks more like a Plains Indian. 

There's also been a lot said about how "dumb" the natives must have been to sell the Dutch this big old island of Manhattan for $24. Personally, I wouldn't pay that much for it now.

According to my sources and my very brief research, when the explorers arrived, they ran into some natives at the southern end of Manhattan Island and offered to purchase the island flat out. The natives agreed, took the trinkets, and left. Well, some sources tell us that the Dutch were duped. The Dutch actually paid the wrong natives for the island because the island really belonged to another group of natives. The Dutch had encountered poachers hunting without permission and bought the island.

Sometimes history clears up misconceptions and perhaps even creates the need to ask more questions to improve our understanding. At the very least, some matters need clearing up, and a study of history attempts to do this.

While we are at it, consider this above image too.

This is an image of a monument placed in lower Manhattan by the good people of the Netherlands. It depicts the Dutch purchase of the island of Manhattan from the natives. You may have heard the story in school about how the Dutch came in and purchased Manhattan for around $24 worth of beads and other trinkets. In today's dollars, that would be about $1,000.

While I don't dispute that this happened, I think that this lovely statue that the people of the Netherlands gave us certainly misses the mark. First, depending upon the season, you're going to have one very cold Native American and one comfortable Dutch explorer, or you're going to have one very hot Dutch explorer and one comfortable Native American.

In my brief and narrow research of this particular event, I believe the statue does not depict a Native American of the New England region. The native standing there really looks more like a Plains Indian. 

There's also been a lot said about how "dumb" the natives must have been to sell the Dutch this big old island of Manhattan for $24. Personally, I wouldn't pay that much for it now.

According to my sources and my very brief research, when the explorers arrived, they ran into some natives at the southern end of Manhattan Island and offered to purchase the island flat out. The natives agreed, took the trinkets, and left. Well, some sources tell us that the Dutch were duped. The Dutch actually paid the wrong natives for the island because the island really belonged to another group of natives. The Dutch had encountered poachers hunting without permission and bought the island.

Sometimes history clears up misconceptions and perhaps even creates the need to ask more questions to improve our understanding. At the very least, some matters need clearing up, and a study of history attempts to do this.

Now, consider this photograph of the county courthouse in Cleveland, Mississippi.

In all of my travels throughout the South, I always seem to run into a Courthouse Square that has a monument to soldiers and sailors who lost their lives in the American Civil War. As you can see from the photo, there is a monument to the Confederate dead in Cleveland, Mississippi. While there is a time and place for a discourse about the need for memorials such as this, I want to point out one straightforward problem in this photo.

There were no Confederate deaths from Cleveland, Mississippi, in the American Civil War because there were no soldiers from Cleveland, Mississippi, in the American Civil War. Cleveland, Mississippi, did not exist during the American Civil War. If you could roll back time, before the 1870s, you would be looking at a forest. This area was uninhabited.

Studying history helps us pause and be inquisitive about the nature of things. In this case, why is a monument to Confederate Soldiers and Sailors in the courtyard square of Cleveland, Mississippi?

And finally, you have a postage stamp above that portrays George Washington praying at Valley Forge during the American Revolution. As you remember from your Elementary School history lessons, we were at war with Great Britain over American independence in the late 1770s.

The American Army entered its winter quarters at Valley Forge, Pennsylvania, from December of 1777 to June of 1778. You might also remember that during that winter, the American Army suffered terribly from a lack of food, clothing, and shelter. As the story goes, a farmer travels through the area when he hears a sound in the forest. He investigated the sound and found General George Washington kneeling beside his horse in the snow, praying for divine intervention in this terrible winter.

If you search the web, you will find many illustrations depicting this instance. The United States commemorated this event with a postage stamp. But this event probably did not happen.

We know that the story came from Mason Locke Weems. Sometimes we refer to him as Parson Weems. He was an American author who wrote the first biography of George Washington and a series of apocryphal stories about Washington. These stories offered a moral lesson, but we're not based on fact.

"You may have heard that Washington's dad once wondered who chopped down his cherry tree. And you may have heard that little George Washington as a boy, came up to his dad and said,"I cannot tell a lie; I did it with my little hatchet." That story, too, is a fabrication. It is likely that Augustine Washington would have taken off and wailed the thunder out of little George for chopping down a valuable fruit tree on the Washington Plantation. Then again, Augustine Washington died when George was 11 years old. 

So, maybe not. Because neither Parson Weems nor I was around when this happened, I can be just as sure of my own rendition of this as Parson Weems was of his."You may have heard that Washington's dad once wondered who chopped down his cherry tree. And you may have heard that little George Washington as a boy, came up to his dad and said, "I cannot tell a lie; I did it with my little hatchet." That story, too, is a fabrication. It is likely that Augustine Washington would have taken off and wailed the thunder out of little George for chopping down a valuable fruit tree on the Washington Plantation. Then again, Augustine Washington died when George was 11 years old. So, maybe not. Because neither Parson Weems nor I was around when this happened, I can be just as sure of my own rendition of this as Parson Weems was of his.

But What About Revisionist History?

From your reading above, we have somewhat "danced around" the idea of revisionism. Revisionist history refers to the reexamination and reinterpretation of historical events, often intending to present a different perspective or challenge commonly accepted beliefs and narratives. This term implies that the revised interpretation distorts the historical record for ideological, political, or cultural reasons."But What About Revisionist History?

From your reading above, we have somewhat "danced around" the idea of revisionism. Revisionist history refers to the reexamination and reinterpretation of historical events, often intending to present a different perspective or challenge commonly accepted beliefs and narratives. This term implies that the revised interpretation distorts the historical record for ideological, political, or cultural reasons.

Revisionist historians may question established narratives, challenge traditional viewpoints, or seek to highlight overlooked aspects of history. While some revisionist efforts aim to provide a more nuanced understanding of events, others may involve deliberate attempts to rewrite history to serve particular agendas.

It's important to note that not all reinterpretations of history are negative or inaccurate. Historians routinely reassess and refine their understanding of the past as new evidence emerges, perspectives evolve, and methodologies improve. However, "revisionist history" often describes more controversial and ideologically driven reinterpretations that depart significantly from the mainstream. For a more "down home" response to this concern, let's read a recent editorial from Dr. W. Todd Groce, President of the Georgia Historical Society. Kindly visit this link and read his article on page four (Groce, 2023).

Summary

In this class, we will tackle some historical events that brought us to where we are in agricultural education and extension education. You may find as we go that there are some inconvenient truths. That's what's going to make this class so much fun.

Like any research endeavor, our conclusions may be entirely or partially wrong.

The goal here is not to be 100% sure of our historical past but to study it and get closer to the truth. Once you have completed reading and contemplating all of this, please answer the question on the discussion post for the week. Before you submit anything online, I ask that you create a pseudonym and email that to me. Do not use your real name on the discussion board. Do not be alarmed if you submit a discussion posting and do not see it show up immediately. I moderate all comments on the discussion board.

60-Minute Assignment for Week One

Please visit my weblog and read the post entitled, "Using 'yesterday' to figure out 'today.'" Please comment by answering the question in the post. To do this, scroll to the bottom of the post and find a section labeled Leave a Reply. Be sure to include your first name only in your reply. If you prefer to mask your identity, please use a pseudonym (and let me know by email what your pseudonym is).

References

Groce, W. T. (2023). Don't get all mad about it. Georgia History Today, 17(2), 4