The source is mislabeled as “brooked beak of heaven” and should be fixed.
This suggestion will likely just seem excessively nit-picky. In regards to the “[n]o America city, in fact, would match Cahokia’s peak population levels…” statement. Although it is somewhat implicitly stated in previous statement”north of modern-day Mexico,” the use of America in the aforementioned sentence only to refer to present day USA and Canada could cause a little confusion. As the writers of this resource I’ve had the pleasure of discovering recently probably already know, the Aztec capital of Tenochtitlan had a size on par with that of Constantinople. Such a fact is likely included in many cite-able sources. The one where I had found it would be The Cambridge Economic History of Latin America: Volume 1, The Colonial Era and the Short Nineteenth Century by Coatsworth, Bulmer-Thomas, and Cortes-Conde.
Thank you for the great work you’ve done with this website. I was never very interested in North American history until I had found this resource!
Poverty Point would be an excellent addition to this paragraph, or as part of a paragraph on trade in early America. http://www.povertypoint.us/
Sentence two states “Europeans rediscovered or adopted Greek, Roman and Muslim knowledge.” That makes no sense. You can not rediscover anything. Europeans blatantly STOLE knowledge, & ideas & accredited it as their own. This is very misleading & should be changed considering that you have a very large audience viewing this textbook.
Role of women
The Enslavement of Native Americans.
End of Civilization
The first two sentences are poorly constructed and repetitive (e.g., word “unleashed” is used repetitively in the first two sentences). Possible rewrite:
“Europeans’ ‘discovery’ of America unleashed waves of destructive exploitation underwritten by murder, greed, and slavery.”
The first two sentences are poorly constructed and repetitive (e.g., word “unleashed” is used repetitively in the first two sentences). Possible rewrite:
“Europeans’ ‘discovery’ of America unleashed waves of destructive exploitation underwritten by murder, greed, and slavery.”
**decline in health
**produced more foods
**pusured other skills
**people were able to do other things rather then just make food
Sistema de Castas, not Casas
This sixteenth century drawing depicts the Spanish and their Tlaxcalan allies fighting against the Purépecha, not the Aztec. The text on this image includes “guzmã,” which stands for “Nuño de Guzmán,” the Spanish conquistador who crushed the Purépecha, who were the people of “michuacá,” which is today’s Michoacán, in western Mexico.
The site at Buttermilk Creek, Texas, dated at roughly 15,500 years ago, predates both Monte Verde and the Florida site mentioned and might be cited as an example of a much earlier date for human activity.
One of the main reasons for the shift from the ecomienda system to the repartimiento was the papal encyclical delivered by Pope Paul III in 1537 and adopted by the Spanish monarchy, the Sublimus Dei. Which stated that the Native Americans “are by no means to be deprived of their liberty or the possession of their property…nor should they be in any way enslaved…” This
This paragraph is rather disingenuous. Not one source in entire paragraph to support these claims. So many qualifiers in every statement without one specific instance of any tribe/people/group, anywhere in America who practiced sexual liberation and care-free divorces. Five thousand plus years of Native American history where mass human sacrifice and territorial fighting and raids were commonplace surely also saw many machismo tribes and polygamy was probably common among warring tribes where women were taken as brides by the victors.
Europeans CAN rediscover that knowledge if it was known previously but was lost. That’s the whole point of the word “rediscover”. Europeans can also learn and adapt from others (Greeks, Romans, Muslims). Human beings adopt superior ideas and knowledge, that is a universal trait for all cultures and societies. It is unfair to attribute bad intent upon one massive group for no other reason then irrational dislike for them.
The book should make a distinction between Columbus and the conquistadors and colonists that came after him. Columbus never killed any natives and had constantly warned the men under his command to not enact violence on them. Bartolomé de Las Casas book was written in 1542 (published in 1552), decades after Columbus died in 1506. de Las Casas admired Columbus, who his father sailed with to the New World on Columbus’s second voyage (1493). It is unfair to place Columbus in a disparaging and inaccurate light and connect him to the cruelty others had wrought on the natives. A helpful source on Christopher Columbus comes from Carol Delaney, Professor of Anthropology who wrote a book on Columbus called: Columbus and the Quest for Jerusalem (2011).
Native Americans were Catholics, who spoke Norse. Therir ancestors were NOT in America until the Mississippian Culture, wich is dated from AD 800.
I only noticed the S in people(s), (l.8) that should maybe be removed
I have just begun reading this, and it is very well done, thank you.
[bridged more than ten thousand years of geographic separation]
This implies that there was communication and altercations before ten thousand years when in reality Europeans have not made contact with Native Americans in history until this point. So “more than ten thousand years” should in reality be a lot more
Interesting that the title of the chapter is The New World when in the very first sentences the authors note that is a misconception and misnomer. Why not follow the lead of historians such as Daniel Richter and refer to the “ancient” Americas or use a similar concept?
Native Americans lived and developed governing systems within their own beliefs and knowledge of the Americas before the Europeans “discovered” their new world. Before their arrival and greedy mindset brought disease, separation and segregation and slavery to the Americas. Similar tactics were in place however were more humane toward both humans and animals.
Native American stories of how the earth was created by their indigenous belief systems. The broad scope of the stories aren’t much different than religious mindset. Both have similar outcomes with different story line. Archaeologist and anthropologist focus on a scientific study of artifacts, bones, genetic signatures tell their own story to give a similar timeline with scientific evidence.
Through evidence collected after the global ice age between 12 and 20,000 years ago was when human hunter gatherers traveled in small groups as means of survival in the new land of Asia and America.
The was a division of native group that understood the vast benefits of their surroundings. Those in the NW had salmon filled rivers. Plains and prairie, deserts, and forest the cultures were as different as their environment.
Mesoamericans relied on maize/corn for survival and this began the agriculture. North America continues to hold the importance of those that began the development and sustainability of North America.
If they were so good at surviving, then how come they didn’t live into their 100’s?
That’s a keen observation; I guess they author’s intention is to appeal to the perspective of the European settlers, but being a valued historical textbook, they probably should have opted for a more objective title. I agree…I wonder why they chose that approach.
The first Dutch and Swedish settlers who encountered the Lenapes in the seventeenth century recognized Lenape prosperity and quickly sought their friendship. Their lives came to depend on it.
I believe Bryan served in the US House, representing Nebraska, not “the Nebraska House of Representatives.” Similarly, he was unsuccessful in his campaign for the US Senate, not “the Nebraska Senate.”
My name pickle jeff
typo: poise should read poised
In the reference material section, the Industrial Workers of the World are mistakenly listed as the “International” Workers of the World.
Hello. I need amanda huginkiss. Can someone give me amanda hugikiss.
Hola Jeff. Me llamo Hector.
I give hug and kiss.
Hello I am Anika
“In the summer of 1886, the campaign for an eight-hour day, long a rallying cry that united American laborers, culminated in a national strike on May 1, 1886.” What kind of sentence is this? It’s like a run-on sentence made of sentence fragments. Should “long” be “rang”?
Nevermind. I get it.
should there be a comma?
The artist’s name is misspelled – should be Snyder not Synder
Paragraph 1 seems to have an editing error, as the second sentence does not make sense.
It should possibly read as follows:
“That year, mired in the stagnant economy that followed the bursting of the railroads’ financial bubble in 1873, rail lines slashed workers wages even as they reaped enormous government subsidies and paid shareholders lucrative stock dividends.”
Honestly the sentence should possibly be broken down into multiple sentences, as it seems like a run-on sentence.
The sermon was delivered in Enfield, Mass/Conn., not Northampton.
The line “15 to 20 percent of Pennsylvania’s colonial population was enslaved by 1750” is not supported by the reference, which shows that approximately 2% of PA residents were enslaved.
I believe the two women are named “hypocrisy” and “deceit”
My students have been pretty confused by this paragraph b/c it makes little distinction between trade regulations pre-1764 and post-1764. Seems like there should be at least some mention that the Sugar Act was in large part about better forcing existing duties through Admiralty courts, etc.
Unclear which of the particular regulations listed were passed in 1705 and which came earlier.
Georgia was founded by a philanthropic group, known as the Georgia Trustees. Oglethorpe was just one member and it is incorrect to label him the founder. The Georgia Trustees banned slavery.
I noticed a small error in the American Yawp version of Gibson Clough’s War Journal.
Here is a short quote from the current Yawp version of Gibson Clough’s War Journal:
“Here begins the New Year 1700”
The actual version on the Essex Institute Historical Collections in the Internet Archive cited below the online version on this cite reads:
“Here begins the New Year 1760”
The last sentence repeats the House of Burgese’s Slave codes and I find the last sentence redundant.
This is really quite vague and dated. First, Fred Anderson’s excellent Crucible of War has become the go-to book for the French and Indian War. Second, there has been much recent scholarship on American colonists — both wealthy speculators and their agents (Washington was one of these agents) — giving land grant in the Ohio Forks region. These grants were what spurred the French to build forts, and this in turn provoked the English to respond. The Yawp text here is grossly over-simplified; especially considering that conflict between British administrators and American land speculators and squatters will be one of the major reasons for the Revolution. And we know this because it says so in the Declaration of Independence.
Alan Taylor, American Revolutions.
Colin Calloway, The Indian World of George Washington.
While I have enjoyed reading the information provided, I believe that Queen Anne’s War (1702-1713) and King George’s War (1744-1748) also need to be included into the text. These two wars not only assist in laying the foundation for the French and Indian War and showing continued conflict between the two empires, but also shows growing frustrations with the colonists and the British crown. The treaties of Utrecht and Aix-la-Chapelle could both be seen as a slap in the face of the colonists who fought hard to win territory, only to have to return it to the French.
feel like something is missing
feels like something is missing
There is an extra A at the beginning of this paragraph
The last sentence seems to have a flaw, all that is needed is to add the word “do”.
“…should ask themselves what they could __ to enact the kingdom…”
The last sentence of this paragraph refers to “Carnegie’s U.S. Steel,” implying that Andrew Carnegie was running U.S. Steel when Taft was President. I don’t believe that was the case.
their is nothing about frank norris in here plz add him
You spelled “please” incorrectly. In addition, you spelled your own name, “George”, incorrectly. You have also used the incorrect “there”. You neglected to capitalize your first letter, add a comma between “here” and “please”, and you forgot a period to conclude. It would please me if you corrected these errors.
It is the National American Woman Suffrage Association not the National American Suffrage Association.
You have it wrong here again: It is the National American Woman Suffrage Association
It should be U.S. Steel not Carnegie’s U.S. Steel.
Rose Schneiderman. Not Ruth.
The bibliography seems to have been pasted twice.
Americans goal was coming true: “that the United States would become a diverse but cohesive prosperous nation”
new nation was having difficulties and tried to resolve them by putting emphasis on “unity and cooperation”
Even the Constitution was controversial and tried to strengthen the government to help resist internal conflicts
farmers were in a great debt in western Massachusetts and was increased by weak local and national economies
farmers were afraid of getting shut down by their creditors so they fought for their property
soldiers helped fight as well
The farmers and soldiers were named the “Shaysites”.
They were led by a veteran named Daniel Shays
They resorted to tactics used by the patriots before the Revolution
governor, James Bowdoin believed that the Shaysites ere rebels who wanted to rule the government through mob violence.
Didn’t we learn that Abraham Lincoln made thanksgiving a national holiday??
I believe you need to expound more on the New Jersey plan to the students. After all, prior to the Great Compromise the delegates debated for two weeks over a bicameral (Virginia Plan) and a unicameral (New Jersey Plan). At least give the credit to the person that presented it to the Convention, William Paterson.
This would be a great place to discuss more of the Bill of Rights. All in all you have barely provided a sentence to what Rights the Bill protects. Especially in today’s political climate and the fact that a majority of High School students do not understand the Bill of Rights, namely the ninth and tenth amendments.
Looksie here bud i hate ur and ur mom
Owo whats THIS *notices your bulge*
Lik if u cri everytim
“Former one-term Georgia governor Jimmy Carter…”. This is true, but it implies that Carter lost his run for a second term. He was term-limited so he couldn’t run. I would strike the reference to one term.
Robert F. Kennedy was killed, not Robert F. Kennedy Jr., his son.
The paragraph ends with the word detente” with a closed quote sign. Just a typographical error.
Would be useful to mention the Equal Pay Act specifically.
The last 2 sentences read “Americans cringed at Nick Ut’s wrenching photograph of a naked Vietnamese child fleeing an American napalm attack. More and more American voices came out against the war.”
Surely the photograph in question should be included, at the very least, in the Primary Sources that accompany this chapter.
This paragraph fails to note that Gavrilo Princip was a member of Black Hand. It also suggests that Austria-Hungary was aggressively seeking to annex Serbia, but ignores the expansionist “Greater Serbia” ideology of Black Hand, as well as the role of Austria-Hungary in supporting the Obrenovic dynasty over the then-ruling Karadjordic Dynasty.
This here says that Lodge’s opponents managed to block entry into the League of Nations. How can this be so if Lodge himself was an opponent?
Should it be: “Wilson’s opponents successfully blocked America’s entry into the League of Nations” not Lodge’s opponents but Wilson’s?
“Victor Huerta” should be “Victoriano Huerta”
It should be the “Austro-Hungarian Empire,” not the “Austrian-Hungarian Empire.”
should be: “Lodge’s supporters” not “Lodge’s opponents”
It says that Pres Wilson was the First to travel overseas while in office. This may be misleading, as Teddy Roosevelt traveled to Panama in 1909 during canal construction.
While he didn’t cross an ocean, “overseas” is commonly understood to mean outside the country, especially if it involves water travel.
consider replacing “overseas” with “to Europe” or “outside the western hemisphere” or “across an ocean”
“be” should be inserted between “a” and “fatal” in the following sentence: “Although much of the equipment still needed to make the transatlantic passage, the physical presence of the army proved to a fatal blow to German war plans.”
There needs to be a section in this or the next chapter on the Red Scare. It astounds me that there is no mention at all of Abrams v. United States (1919), and the great dissent of Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.
MY TOES ARE EMPTY
The inclusion of the phrase “salutary neglect” in this paragraph or in paragraph #9 of the same chapter referencing British colonial policy would be helpful. The phrase can help students name the colonial policy more succinctly and provides a utilitarian short form for them to use in writing/referring to the time period.
Thank you all–the Yawp is everything good about academics!
Just a style thing: “throughout the colonies” appears twice in quick succession and three times in this paragraph. 11 times in the chapter total.
This paragraph is confusing. The previous paragraph says, correctly, that the Tea Act exempted the EIC from having import duties applied to its Tea. So the the phrase “colonists would be paying the duty” needs clarification.
In other words, needs clarification that EIC did not have to pay import duties but purchasers of tea still had to pay standard duties on their purchases.
[in the colonies]
This seems redundant as the sentence begins with “Colonial”
“Colonial political culture in the colonies”
This is redundant, it should be “Political culture in the colonies” or “Colonial political culture”
MY TOES ARE FULL
Why was the south in ruins ?
Im thinking what could have happen for a person to think omg its so unbelievable what happen and I have no idea what happen in their own place that they live
“barely good roads”
missing ending parenthesis at the end of paragraph
You see, the thing about wars….
[These so-called Lincoln governments sprang up in pockets where Union support existed like Louisiana, Tennessee, and Arkansas. Unsurprisingly, these were also the places that were exempted from the liberating effects of the Emancipation Proclamation.]
Emancipation Proclamation was more of a blow to the rebelling states, not to actually abolish slavery. The less rebellious states were rewarded by getting to keep their slaves.
is that a typo for level
There is no conclusion for this chapter. All of the other chapters so far, have one.
This chapter absolutely needs a detailed recounting of Jackson’s Indian Removal policy, culminating in the trail of tears. It’s a huge whole in what is presented in the chapter.
The Trail of Tears is mentioned later in chapter 12, but I agree with Ryan that it would be far better to include that information here. Perhaps it could be briefly recapped in chapter 12 but presented in depth here?
I’d love to add a sentence either here or in paragraph 10 that connects to the image in terms of the rise of political parties and, well, partying and campaigning.
Is this the place to mention the spoils system/rotation in office? Postal clerks were generally the only source of hard currency, especially in the frontier so the democratization of gvt. work regardless of qualifications sets up the bank war.
Can I make a suggestion for an additional entry to the Recommended Reading section? Stephen Campbell has recently published a monograph on the Bank War with the University Press of Kansas. It is one of the few monographs to come out on this subject in the last forty years and it is also one of the most detailed. I do believe that reading this monograph closely will improve the section on the Bank War for this chapter. Thank you for your consideration.
The date range in the title of this primary source should read “1819-1820,” not 1920 as appears here and on the page with the document itself.
[ He defended the impulsive general, arguing that he had had been forced to act.]
Mormon should be changed Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. This was and still is the real name of the religion.
Spelling correction: runaway
honestly taught me nothing, horrible website, never to be used again. #disapointing
This is a very shallow summary of the life of Joseph Smith and the impact he had on religion in America.
A few clarifications—the rites he instituted in the temples were not “secret” as it says. They were held very sacred to members of the church, and were not to be shared outside the temple because of its sacredness.
When this mentions polygamy, it mentions nothing about why it was instituted among members of this church —the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (not the “Mormon Church”). Polygamy was very distasteful to most members of the church. They were only willing to participate in it because they believed it was a commandment that god restored once again—a commandment which he had given to many other biblical prophets. Joseph Smith never claimed ownership of the idea of polygamy, but that he received divine revelation and commandment from God to institute it among the people for the purpose of accelerating the growth of a righteous people. This is why they did it, not because they were experimenting sexually.
The way this paragraph is worded is mildly offensive
Also, Joseph Smith did not borrow the idea of sending out missionaries from the Methodists. He was a prophet who drew upon revelation from God, not from existing religious organizations. He also drew inspiration from the New Testament, The Book of Mormon, and from revelations given to him (since he was a prophet) which are now compiled and known as the Doctrine and Covenants.
Is this what’s now called Oregon State, or the Oregon Territory?
this all can be edited don’t trust it
Verb tense should be changed in sentence #2 of this paragraph. It should read:
“This treaty ceded lands in Georgia for $5 million and, the signatories hoped, would limit future conflicts between the Cherokee and white settlers.
In paragraph 29, there is an extra word that should be removed. It says:
“Not every instance was of removal was as treacherous…”
The first “was” in that sentence should be removed.
In the sentence that begins “Not every instance…” in paragraph 29, the transition “while, on the other hand,” does not seem to fit well. This sentence might be better divided into two sentences, with some minor changes also made to the sentence that follows. Perhaps:
“Not every instance of removal was as treacherous or demographically disastrous as the Cherokee example. Furthermore, tribes responded in a variety of ways. Some tribes violently resisted removal. Ultimately, over sixty…”
The periodization with this is awkward. Manifest Destiny is best dealt with as a Western phenomenon. Indian Removal should be dealt with earlier under the Age of Jackson. Placing it here makes this chapter longer than it need be, and confuses the issues here.
Font size does not match the rest of the chapter. Besides this paragraph, the font size is not consistent in other parts of Sections 1-3 of Chapter 2. Please fix for readability, especially for visually impaired readers.
Puritans were stereotyped as killjoys, Puritans did not succeed. Puritans would not stay away from alcohol or sex based on their religion or life style.Puritans believe that the European church was to close to Catholicism.
I feel that you should include the term iconoclasm here as this was the name given to the abolition or ornate churches, and that the definition should be expanded upon a but to show the full breath of reforms that the Puritans were attempting to achieve.
There needs to be a section dedicated to the explorations of de Soto.
Not sure where you are getting your information from, but Oñate cut off the foot of every male above the age of 25. He enslaved everyone between the ages of 12-25.
Diseases wiped out entire civilizations
nutrient rich foods help European population
Spaniard slaughter acoma of 1500 inhabitants
Black legend – drew on religous diff, and political rivalries
Middle ground The great lakes had lots of success
Labor shortages crippled the Dutch
the puritians commited to reforming the church of england
Did they really only import eleven slaves?
im just tryna remove this
it didnt even work…smh
maybe please don go
In an open-book exam, I asked students to describe the difference between indentured servants and enslaved workers, and many students went to this paragraph to seek an explanation. The inclusion of “tithable” is confusing to students, and while this point in the legal history can be clarifying for scholars, it makes no sense to readers in an introductory survey course. Also, I never found a clear statement of the distinctions between indentured servants and enslaved workers, but maybe I have missed it.
It might be more useful to include this specific reference to the notion of an African woman being “tithable” in a footnote, but to state the legal status of enslaved people more plainly.
I think the Gallay reference should be in an endnote?
I have your son
“Nuclear” is misspelled. In addition, the sentence might be better structured by writing as follows: “J. Robert Oppenheimer, director of the Los Alamos nuclear laboratory…
Soured should be soared – first sentence
Please ignore this. I’m studying for a final and forgot that “soured” is actually a word.
Paul Robeson was an American Actor and singer, not signer.
Same as above comment. Typo
Wernher von Braun should not be referred to as a “former top German rocket scientist”. Instead, he should be referred to as a “Nazi rocket scientist”. This reference is more conducive to maintenance of the truth.
The end of this paragraph mentions “containment” for the first time. What that means is never defined anywhere in the chapter.
a a = remove one of them
In fact, the South experienced a a greater rate of urbanization between 1820 and 1860 than the seemingly more industrial, urban-based North.
independant = incorrectly spelled
The link to University of Virginia doesn’t work, or at least didn’t work for me.
Found a typo, I believe there should only be one “a”
Slaves had become more valuable and expensive.
It seems as though this section indicates that the rise of American cotton is directly responsible for the advent of the modern fashion system, which is not the case. “Fashion” – where styles change for change’s sake – has been present since the 1400s. People have been wearing decoration on their apparel that goes beyond utility since apparel was developed.
The use of the word “honest” seems disingenuous as well – all clothing has a function (to cover the body; to differentiate gender, age, status, etc; to protect from the elements…). What does “honest” refer to?
Morgan — and others, including John Thornton — show that those first “20 Negars and then some” were not exactly unfree. Or if they were, they were as “unfree” as poor white indentured servants from England were. Virginia colonists baptized those first 20 men from Africa (who were traded for food). According to English law, a person who was baptized could not be enslaved. This would change, of course. See “The Terrible Transformation,” part of the PBS series, Africans in the Americas.
The story of Anthony Johnson is instructive. He arrived in the VA colony somewhere around 1619. He was baptized and he somehow managed to survive his term of servitude (unlike most in the first generations of the colony — the colony was a death trap). Johnson got his freedom dues and at some point he purchased “head rights” so that by 1655 he owned a modest plantation on which he grew tobacco. That was the year that one of his servants, a black man from Africa named Cesar, sued Johnson for his freedom. Cesar lost. Significant is that the local magistrate not only heard the case between two black men, but less significant is that he ruled in Johnson’s favor.
When I teach Morgan and I pull out this primary source it doesn’t take long for my students to figure out why the magistrate ruled in Johnson’s favor: he was a landowner.
Colonists were still working out how racial inferiority and slavery was going to operate in the colony (and also neighboring colony of Maryland). You begin to see this gradually; but after Bacon’s Rebellion in 1676 planters begin to move toward racialized slavery faster and systematically for a variety reasons, not least of which was that they wanted to continue to exploit workers to produce cash crop and at the same time mitigate the possibilities for interracial uprisings against the ruling elites.
fix “InIn” in the beginning of paragraph 67
At the beginning of the paragraph, there is an extra “In” at the beginning of the sentence.
There are two “In”s
I’m writing on behalf of an undergraduate class of students at Rice University, who suggest:
“We would suggest elaborating on the final phrase ‘in the hands of those who opposed it.’ It’s an incredibly nebulous phrase that fails to identify the full scope of massive resistance to desegregation, and leaves it to the reader to assume who the opponents of integration were. The photographs demonstrate resistance, but one way to incorporate it into the text would be to cite the Southern Manifesto. Several high profile political figures including all but three southern senators were a part of the aforementioned massive resistance, and they should be identified (for details on this and their names, see James Patterson, Grand Expectations, Page 398). This will improve the narrative by telling a more accurate picture of how Brown v Board was received by the country.”
In paragraph 67, there is an extra “In” at the beginning.
[dozens of slates]
minor typo – should be “slaves”
Text Says Tauten, Maine (which I don’t think has ever existed). The referenced source clearly says Tauton, Ma.
Correct to “and a new, more-commercial”
The 5th sentence should read, “through institutions such as the House of Refuge in New York City…”
jeffery Epstein didnt kill himself
Which period? Perhaps provide a date or timespan, as that would help give context
Mahan was arguably the most influential American strategist of the 19th and early 20th Centuries. It would be helpful to include a selection from his work, “The Influence of Sea Power upon History” in the primary sources for this chapter.
This paragraph basically reproduces the content of paragraph 39.
“For instance” used twice in close proximity. Consider revision.
Perhaps: “In spite of their christian motivations, some Missionaries worked alongside business interests. American missionaries in Hawai’i, for example, obtained large tracts of land on which they started lucrative sugar plantations.”
I think the topic of Hawaiian annexation needs to be addressed with more detail. Sanford B. Dole, King Kalākaua, The Bayonet Constitution, Queen Liliuokalani and other details deserve to be discussed.
The separation of Panama from Colombia took place in 1903, not 1901.
i love jungkook
[In 1919, the UNIA announced plans to develop a shipping company called the Black Star Line as part of a plan that pushed for blacks to reject the political system and to “return to Africa” instead.”]
I see that there is an unnecessary quotation after Africa at the end of this sentence, but please let me know if it is there on purpose.
In the 6th paragraph of the primary source, on the 4th line, the word “the” is not spelled correctly. There is also an “s” in the middle of the sentence, where it is supposed to be attached to the end of the word “it.”
Secretarty of the Navy Edwin Denby was never convicted and was never sent to jail. Please reference the Denby Family Papers in the Library of Congress Database.
This chapter does not mention anything about Native Americans becoming citizens of The United States for the first time ever.
If mentioned, please disregard.
Caption is wrong. It should be National Woman’s Party not Women’s. Plus it it is pretty poor caption. They implies ws was won by the NWP alone. What is the purpose of the tea party?
last line: an America (not American) riven
Some of the paragraphs the text size is smaller then others for not apparent reason.
I don’t know if there is way to fix that but, if possible please try.
It would be fantastic if there were instructor resources (quiz questions, etc.) available as well.
It would be useful to include in the primary sources for Chapter 6, the US Constitution, since so much of that chapter is dedicated to that document. It would also be nice to include a selection from The Federalist Papers so students can understand the framing of the debate over the Constitution. Given the polarized nature of the electorate today, perhaps Federalist 10 would serve the purpose.
It would be great if you could highlight the text and underline it, as if it were a real textbook. Having a toolbar that allows you to take notes like you do in a physical book would be utterly helpful.
The book cannot teach for you, its not meant for that.
The Battle of Whitestone Hill took place from Sept. 3-5. Although the bulk of the fighting occurred on the 3rd, there were engagements on the 4th and 5th. Also, estimates of Sioux casualties range from 100-300. Might want to mention the name of the battle as well.
Annie shot apples off of her English Setter, I can’t find any information about a poodle.
this is very bad
Titling this chapter “Conquering the West” perpetuates a triumphalist view of westward expansion and valorizes the perpetrators of genocide against Native peoples during the nineteenth century.
I strongly disagree. The title is cynical is can be used as a talking point in class what “Conquering the West” really meant, themes that the chapter certainly doesn’t valorize.
For example, I title one of my lectures “The Wild West” not because I wax poetic on duels at high noon, but because it provides a jumping off point to describe the mythology of the Wild West and why Americans engaged in myth-making.
I suggest a word change in this sentence:
Immigrant communities published newspapers in dozens of languages and purchased spaces to maintain their arts, languages, and traditions alive.
Either remove the word “alive’ or change the word “maintain” to “keep.” Such a change will improve the readability of the passage. Thank you.
This paragraph should mention and define patronage so students reading this will wonder why in the world machine bosses engaged in these types of “mutual aid” activities.
There is a typo towards the end of the paragraph:
“A Russian Jewish family persecuted in European pogroms…” should be programs.
plz help me this reading takes too long
“Pogroms” is the correct word here. A pogrom is an organized riot/massacre. I’ve only ever heard the term used in this specific situation, where Europeans planned the wholesale destruction of a Jewish community.
“Comprehending Japanese motivations for attacking China and the grueling stalemate of the ensuring war are crucial for understanding Japan’s seemingly unprovoked attack on Pearl Harbor, Hawaii”
Is the word “ensuring” supposed to be “ensuing”?
Yes it was. It’s fixed now. Thanks!
Not a criticism but more a request. I didn’t see much or any mention of the lend-lease program championed by Roosevelt preceding the U.S. entry into the war. This chapter would benefit from a section on it as this was vital to Roosevelt’s attempt to bypass the rest of the country’s isolationist perspectives.
Reintroduces and re-explains material introduced in paragraph 63.
typos: James Peale’s name and “responsible” are spelled incorrectly
Should say: roles as wives and mothers, not as mothers.
Additionally: typos as listed above.
Shouldn’t the Republicans actually be called the “Democratic-Republicans,” since the actual Republican party wasn’t started until the 1850s to combat slavery?
“White supremacist” – presentism
“white supremacist” wasn’t a title/term used during that time period, should be changed to “white superficial beliefs/assumptions” or something of the sort
I don’t think this is a “photograph” like it says it is.
the south was right
You just need to insert the opening parentheses before “Peace Democrat” at the end of the paragraph 🙂
The characterization of Douglas as pro-slavery is misleading and confusing. While Douglas’ personal position on the slavery question remains up for debate (see Graham Peck’s Making an Antislavery Nation and Adam I.P. Smith’s The Stormy Present for contrasting perspectives) the fact that mattered at Charleston in 1860 was that he had taken a moderately anti-slavery stand over Lecompton– thus alienating Southern Democrats. The Douglas Democrats failed to adopt an explicitly pro-slavery platform at Charleston and stuck to popular sovereignty (with all of its ambiguity). For clarity in this paragraph, I would simply label Douglas as “a champion of popular sovereignty” rather than “a pro-slavery moderate.”
The 1937 strike at GM in Flint, MI was not “the first instance of a ‘sit-down’ strike.” It’s debated which was the first sit-down strike in US labor history, but many cite a brewery workers strike in Cincinnati in 1884, or Akron, Ohio rubber workers strike in 1936. The 1937 sit-down at Flint was probably the most historically significant sit-down strike, but not the first use of the tactic.
BIG WEE WEE IN A BUTT
George Wallace did not by any means embody conservative views, he was a typical, racist liberal democrat. This needs to be changed immediately. This skewing of history books to fit an agenda bullshit needs to stop. Write the history as it happened. Stop being assholes, thanks. The democrats are the true racists from the beginning. They always have been and will continue to be.
The most prominent pre-UFWA Latino rights group after WWII was the GI Forum led by Hector Garcia. They first broke into national prominence by their support for Felix Longoria, a WWII fatality whose family was denied waking rights in the local chapel in Three Rivers, Texas. This greatly expanded their reach as they organized Latino vets all over the country to fight for GI Bill and voting rights. They were successful in these fights and even got the first Latinos appointed to high office as a result of their political support of Kennedy and Johnson with the Viva Kennedy and Viva Johnson clubs.
They should have a paragraph of their own in the 1950s chapter, but at least a meniton in the line in front of MAPA and MALDF.
Dave, Please do not use foul mouth. Also, you wrote that comment at 4:30 am… how logical could your thought process have been.
Hope you do well in life Dave.
I think you have done a wonderful job of scholarship on what you have in this chapter, but I believe that there are some key aspects that shouldn’t get left out. H.W. Bush’s Panamanian invasion and the ouster of Noriega is missing here. I believe that it fits in with the long shadow of both Cold War anticommunism, globalized economics, Latin American foreign policy and the Drug Wars. I would be happy to provide content if you wished. My feeling was that it belonged somewhere between paragraph 10 and 11.
Should be “Katherine Harris” instead of “Kathleen Harris”
I would suggest less on Clinton’s attacks on Iraq while being sure to mention that a key cause of the Iraq war (besides WMD)was the false allegation that Saddam was allies with al Qaeda. Thank you!
Last sentence doesn’t make specific reference to Haiti. Might be confusing for some…keep up the great work!
I know talking about “liberalism” is alway going to be imperfect, but the phrase “economic liberalism” here is especially apt to be misconstrued. Instructors like myself take the time to peel back common (and historical) misuses of the term liberalism, and usages like this have the potential to undo some of that work.
Hi, this is a comment.
To get started with moderating, editing, and deleting comments, please visit the Comments screen in the dashboard.
Commenter avatars come from Gravatar.
November 17, 2019 at 4:00 am
See in context
November 14, 2019 at 11:32 pm
November 12, 2019 at 11:34 pm
November 12, 2019 at 1:03 am
November 9, 2019 at 4:27 pm
November 4, 2019 at 7:45 pm
October 31, 2019 at 2:12 pm
October 25, 2019 at 5:30 am
October 22, 2019 at 4:22 pm
October 20, 2019 at 1:39 am
Website content © American Yawp / Feedback 2019. All rights reserved.