Zinn

In the chapter "Columbus, the Indians, and Human Progress," Zinn concludes that historians all too often deemphasize the negative aspects of history. Zinn states that many times historians skim over and downplay the bloodshed and enslavement only to promote and overemphasize the moments that we, as readers, are more proud and accepting of. This, Zinn argues, is distorting our history for unnecessary ideological reasons. Zinn goes on to state that history must be looked at from the perspective of the conquered as well.

Zinn argues his position using the relationship between Columbus and the Arawak Indians as his example. The Arawaks were very friendly to Columbus and his sailors when they arrived to this new land. These natives willingly traded everything they owned to the Columbus and his crew. However, Columbus and his men immediately took advantage of the Arawaks. They enslaved many of the natives, forcing them to search for gold that was not there, as well as sending many as slaves back to Spain. The natives were given a quota and punished if they didn’t meet it. The situation quickly turned into mass murder of the native peoples. However, many historians do not include this in their books of Columbus and the discovery of America. Zinn uses Samuel Morison as an example in this chapter. Although Morison does acknowledge the bloodshed and murders briefly, he quickly moves on to more heroic aspects of Columbus. Zinn goes on to state how our history is often told from the conquerors’ and government’s point of view and how it must be looked at from a different perspective.

Zinn’s argument can most readily be applied by historians through their writing. Other authors can do as Zinn has argued and tell history through the perspective of those who were conquered. By doing this, the authors will be able to present a clearer picture of what actually happened rather than the all too often distorted one that we are so accustomed to seeing. However, the story must not only be told through the eyes of the conquered or we will loose the perspective of the conquerors. History must be presented equally from both viewpoints in order to gain an accurate sense of what occurred.

As I read this chapter, I mostly agreed with what Zinn had to say. I was aware of how the Native Americans were treated by the white men who arrived after taking Early American History last semester. However, Zinn seems to imply that all historians deemphasize the not so glorious aspects of our history and that is not the case. In Early American History, we were exposed to numerous different perspectives, many of which happened to emphasize the bloodshed and murders of our nation’s early days.