Does "History" Get Corrected ? (No Air Content)

On this date - 15 February - in 1898 the battleship USS MAINE blew up in Havanna harbour, killing half the crew (about 285 in all). Spanish naval officials conducted an investigation - but the Americans would not allow them to examine the hull itself. The Spaniards concluded that the disaster had been due to an internal explosion - possibly spontaneous combustion in the coal bunkers.

American naval officials conducted an investigation, but the Spanish would not allow examination of the harbour floor. The American investigators concluded it was due to an external cause - a mine or torpedo - and thus the Spanish were the bad guys.

Two months later the two countries were in a one-sided war. Spain was stripped of the last vestiges of empire in the Americas, plus the Phillipenes. For years afterwards, Americans accepted that the war had been due to the MAINE disaster and hence to Spanish provocation.

In 1976, U.S. Navy investigators went over the evidence collected by both Spanish and American experts and concluded that the Spanish had been correct.

Nobody has handed back Peurto Rico to Spain. What do American schools now teach about the origins of the Spanish-American War ? Do they teach anything at all ?

We no want Puerto Rico back

[stephen]

Short answer: "Nothing."

As you know, a certain newspaper had a vested interest in the entire charade as well. I haven't seen the naval report, but I'd be interested to know how they were so sure of the accuracy of their findings 80 years after the fact. School history on it is pitiful, and the causes are poorly explained.

And no, the USA didn't "give" Peurto Rico back to Spain, the Brits didn't give Florida back to Spain, the Spanish didn't give Mexico back to the Aztecs, the Norsemen didn't give Iceland.... how long of a list would you like?

Adniral Dewey said: "Don't cheer boys; those poor devils are dying!"
What do you want to bet that no school book has this important quote? I won't even bother to play the old, scratchy record about history revisionists. I think that you all get the idea by now.

Some years back there was one terrific program about the Maine and Admiral Rikover's (spelling?) investigation. It included the fact that the Maine was raised, removed from Cuban waters and sunk under a sea of wreaths. It was even MOVIE FILMED! This program has aired on PBS & the History Channel and National Geographic covered it in an issue. SEE THE PROGRAM!
As to Manila Bay- Dewey said "You may fire when ready, Gridley" It's damn unfortunate for the spanish that Gridley was ready!

[Stephanie]

Well I'm in complete agreement with Stephen on this one. Four words: Pearl Harbor, Monroe Doctrine. That should about sum that up.

Except that when I was in school, and things have changed drastically in thirty years, we learned quite a bit about the Spanish-American War, namely about Roosevelt and his Rough Riders and about how more men died due to contamination of canned meat than wounds. However, I cannot remember learning too much about who started it, or even if that was considered important!

[Barrett]

In '98 (that's 1998) there was quite a bit of publicity about the destruction of USS Maine but zero-zip-nada on the centennial of the events on San Juan Heights. Complete blackout nationally, and dang little here in Arizona, spiritual home of the Rough Riders. Go figger.
However, the John Milius TV movie about the Rough Riders was definitely worthwhile, even allowing for the factual liberties (Maxim MGs, TR with a Colt SAA, etc.) George Hamilton was in top form as WR Hurst; Sam Elliot was way cool, as always, and my galfriend thinks Brad Johnson's a hunk.

The Japanese schools don’t teach their students who started their war of conquest in the late 30’s either.

The real question isn't "does history get corrected?", for we know that things are being revised in a more accurate way all the time. The real question I think you're at here is "does any of this new information find it's way into educational settings?" The answer is: rarely if ever. Schools across the nation are still spouting the same "traditional" misconceptions they were 10 years ago, even though historical knowledge had radically changed since then. Eventually, this little tidbit of info will find it's way into the textbooks. Hopefully sooner rather than later.

The thing that must be understood is that textbooks are goods, bought by schools according to the laws of supply and demand. If a 'revised' edition of a textbook displays a less favorable, albeit more accurate, picture of the past, it may not sell as well. As with everything, the economic factors take precident. Such is the cost of living in a free-market society (not that I think that's really bad, but every system has it's pitfalls). I personally have heard about this debate from a few past teachers. So far, that's the only representation this new information has had in America's schools.

As attitudes towards "revised history" change, fewer falsehoods will be drilled into the heads of America's youth.

[leo]

Before I left teaching in 1964, I taught American History for ten years. The Maine incident was taught as the US claimed that the sinking was due to a mine place by the Spaniards, but that the Spaniiards had claimed that the explosion was internal. The part played by the Hearst newspaper chaon was also emphasized. In 1997 and since, I hae renewed my teaching career as a substitute teacher. I have had the experience of being able to teach in some US History classes. It is now being taught that the explosion was probably internal and the Hearst role has been emphasized more than before. It might be pointed out that the US in 1898 was spoiling for a war. We almost went to war with Germny over Samoa in that year. We might very well have done so had a storm not wrecked both countries squadrons.