How is the American War for Independance taught in the UK?

[almostgold]

Typical American arrogance to assume it's taught at all.

...its your history too? Then again, it would seem you weren't taught about it so it possible you didnt know.... But yeah, we covered Vietnam, which was one of our more significant fuck ups. Do European school systems glaze over the more negative aspects of your histories more than Americans do ours? I've heard the same thing about the WWII not being covered in Germany.

 

[Shock and Awe]

I'd always wondered this exact thing, and the answer seems to be "it just isn't taught."

I'd say that seems absurd given that every American schoolchild learns the same story again and again every single year from about 3rd through 8th grade, but then again, I didn't know who Horatio Nelson was until I went to London last summer and asked, "who's the dude on the top of the giant friggin' obelisk?"

Thats because you don't get taught anything about the MUCH more important (at least in terms of the era) Napoleonic Wars. The Napoleonic wars were the WW2 of its time, and while the allies (us, russia, sometimes prussia, sometimes holland, portugal) had rather shittier motives (retaining monarchy and generally stomping on poor people) than the WW2 allies, the world would be VASTLY different had Napoleon extended his empire across continental Europe.

America was on Frances side btw. Bet you don't get taught that either.

No, we actually have a year dedicated to World History and the Napoleonic were covered quite thoroughly. Im sorry but you are making incredibly false claims that have no backing.

wow a year on world history then its back to repeating the story of independance.

No, we only have one year dedicated to American History, a majority of our Social Studies is Geography, Civics and Human Geography(cultures, religions, ect). Again, do you know anything about American curriculum or are you just talking out of your fourth point of contact?

 

[crystalsnow]

Snip

It wasn't a global event in itself, as a global event it was part of the prelude to our exciting adventures with France that would continue for a few decades. It didn't make much of a difference at the time, Britain became even more powerful despite losing their colony, and the USA would be little more than an irritant for a while. It was another century before America became a significant power.

I don't see why we'd learn anything more about it just because America became powerful in the 20th century. We generally focus on British and European history, and there's a lot to cover already.

On that note, it's very strange that the first world war is taught as a sort of triumphant victory in America (according to a poster in this thread). In Europe it's taught as a horrible, unrepeatable, senseless waste of human life. I guess being an ocean away contributes to that.

Aha, see this is where you're wrong. We covered all of world history as well as American history, which is why I find it odd that the UK would leave out an important event such as the American Revolution. Perhaps it's a time issue? How many years of history did you take? We take three (as a minimum), one of which is dedicated to world history, one to U.S. History, and one to government/economics (not necessarily U.S. policy although sometimes it is).

As for WWI, it's interesting that you should say it's taught as a triumphant victory, because it isn't. It's actually taught just as pointless and depressing as the way it most likely is for you. It's just that the average idiot has this information go in one ear and out the other and instead hears from other sources about our "glorious" victory. And then everyone gets the impression that we were taught that this was so.

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

Here's a rough overview on the compulsory history subjects from South Australia in the early to mid 80s:


Australian History

A bunch of evil British dicks showed up in NSW, shot a bunch of blackfellas, and dumped a lot of wrongly imprisoned working class heroes there. These working class heroes went on to become excellent sportsmen (and women) and built the greatest country ever. Yay.

A bunch of free settlers bought colony rights to South Australia. They didn't want to be like the other colonies and get filled up with convict scum, instead opting for more German farmers and Cornish miners. These settlers later went on to prove they could become just as good sportsmen (and women) as the convict scum and built the best state in the best country ever no matter what those dicks in Victoria and New South Wales say, the convict scum.

Australian Aboriginals got a shit deal but no one gives a fuck about them.


World History

Australian soldiers went to a bunch of wars, got betrayed by their British superiors, and went on to show that they were the best soldiers in the world even if they did misbehave at times. They also taught the rest of the world to swear properly.

 

[Fiend13]

Yeah, seems I missed that lesson as well. Did a bing search and the only invasion/planned invasion of Japan that I could come up with was during WW2. When did we invade Japan?

According to Wikipedia 'you' (no offense but using this term in his place is wrong as well as unnecessary) never invaded Japan itself due to Operation Downfall being canceled upon Japans surrender in 1945. The war (edit: or armed invasion as the person above me stated - personally i don't see the difference) was mainly fought on and above different islands in the taiwanese area.

 

[Febel]

I dont think people generally are unaware of the American Revolution over there, but if its not being taught legitimatly at school, then its not being taught. I dunno, Im biased though. I actually enjoyed (the good) history classes. Mainly US history.

You have to understand, though, that every country in Europe has at least a thousand or so years of local history to go through before we can even get to the point where the american revolution would become an issue. I live in Sweden. Just in our local history we go through the Ice-, stone-, bronze and iron age(early and latter in all cases), viking era, early medival era, the Folkung era, the Kalmar Union, the Wasa era, the Swedish Empire and then American history starts. And that's omitting a bunch of revolutions and wars and stuff I know I've gotten taught but have forgotten. Aside from this we've got the whole World history, where the American revolution is really just a footnote and we spend years on that before we even get past the medieval era. Because we spend a lot of time going over stuff like European ethnic migrations and so forth, because we need to know why, for example, the Finnish and the Swedish languages are so insanely different even though the countries are an afternoon's boat trip (or a step, up north) apart.

Overall, I think I variously had between 2 and 6 hours of history per week for 12 years while in school, and I'd appreciate that we spent somewhere between 10 and 15 hours on the American revolution directly. The colonial era as a whole got more exposure, though, so I think we get to learn most of the things leading up to the revolution too, it's just not focused on the revolution itself.

Excellent point Lord Veterinari (Please don't have me killed)

 

[LostAlone]

at this point your just as bad as the "Typical American arrogance to assume it's taught at all." guy.

what are you actually trying to achive ? we were asked a question and we've all gave basically the same answer.

British history covers 1000s of years, you might get a mention during a single class but that's about it. go on to higher education and then ye it can be studied but it's not really covered at high school in any depth because we have a hell of a lot to fit in in the 4 or so years you spend wallowing over a couple of centurys.

I agree I've been off topic for a while, but if anything the whole argument shows the difference in both education and world view from both sides.

In real terms, neither of us are right, but at the same time both of us are.

To put it as concisely as I can:

Yes, the revolutionary war mattered. However, it didn't slow down the empire.

In terms of how we teach about the revolutionary war, everyone should remember that the empire hasn't existed in any meaningful sense since the end of the second world war. Even then, it had LONG moved past the point where Britain was rich and all powerful. While we share a name with the empire, we are fundamentally NOT the same people. Everything we look at in history is through that lens. The Empire was what it was, and we are only peripherally connected to that.

So when it comes down to teaching the revolutionary war, its not in terms of a part of 'our' empire getting up and leaving, its a colony that could have been attached to any European power rebelling. It falls along side Brazil and Bolivia and so forth. We just don't touch on it because Napoleon is a much bigger and more interesting topic.

We study lots of history just in the sense of it being interesting, and we don't just look at things that we were involved in. We study the French revolution, right from begining to end, and the Russian revolution too. Compared to both of those, the American one was a lot more of a blip than a bang.

 

[funguy2121]

The text book itself(for Texas) was VERY lacking for the national history portion. The sections for each area were extremely small and given we only had 250 years an 1 1/2 thick text book would seem good. Except it was plastered with pictures and the print was something out of a child's pop up book.

Will clean up my previous point to avoid further confusion.

But as far as i am concerned Texas text books for history suck and go into little depth on most subjects.

Well, that is because they spend a whole YEAR teaching the 12 years Texas was an independent country. Fuck that class, Texas History. It was long, boring, and stupid. No one in my class CARED that Texas was an independent country. Does Massachusetts have a "Massachusetts History" class dealing entirely with the history of being a separate colony until they signed the Articles of Confederation? Not that I know of... But Texas has to be fucking special, and not in a "You win a prize" way, either...

Yup. That was the only year I didn't enjoy history. Well, that and the year I had a teacher who claimed that the Quartering Act had nothing to do the British government forcing colonists to allow soldiers to stay in their homes.

The stars at night, are big and bright...

 

[Charli]

Quite indepth for me. And yeah I'm British. But I didn't go to a government funded school so... yeah.

We were dicks, you were dicks, we had a dick-fest. Outcome was reached! Ta-da.

I liked how it was taught to me, both sides had points and reasons for what they did.
And lucky me a year later I transferred schools because of parents moving around, and got to learn about it from the American perspective.

 

[redspud]

look at this way:

you have 230 odd years of history so over the (i assume) 4-5 years of high school you stretch it out.

we have 1000s to fit into the same period of teaching and we usually start with the stone/bronze age

Speaking from my experience we were taught pre-colonial american history as well as our own. We also covered some English history like the Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights,and Henry VIII. We also go over the the other colonies that were in North America. Also a little bit of the French Revolution.

 

[Spade Lead]

a cotton-pickin' racist

The irony of that is just too much, I had to say something... I just have to know, do you seriously know what the term "Cotton-picking" refers to, or were you just using it because it is a common slander for southerners?

 

[tofulove]

Yeah the war of independence really isn't a big deal in the UK and we simply don't study it at all.

You have to see it through our eyes.

At the time of the revolution we were busy owning practically everything in the world that was worth owning. We were fighting practically everywhere constantly from about 1700 through to 1900 and while we lost a few we won most.

So while the revolution was clearly a big deal for America since you're history is kinda pathetically short and you've flourished so much since, as far as our culture is concerned, it was a tiny unimportant conflict in an unimportant colony for us.

When we study that period of histroy (late 1700's onwards) we look at the French revolution and the Napoleonic wars and not much else.

Oh and I second that we study Vietnam (and Korea come to that) in terms of 'What the hell were they thinking', which tbh is the only accurate way.

so what was the super weapon during those times, big wooden ships, what did you need to make those big wooden ships, what nations lively hood depended on those big wooden ships, and what colony had all the wood to make those big wooden ships. unimportant righhht.

you tend to forget Europe chopped a shit load of its forest for those big wooden ships, and the Americas had a almost unending supply (relative to the need) of said lumber. if you did not control America, your navy would of bin allot smaller and so would your land holdings.

for military concerns, that unimportant American colony was like modern day middle east, you dwindled most of your natural supply of wood, and America was full of old growth perfect for the construction of ships of the line.

and keep in mind, giant old trees are the best kind of trees for big ships of the line, and Europe taped them all out.

trees were so important the English would go out into the forest and specifically mark trees to make sure the royal navy got the best of the best.

 

[Calbeck]

World History

Australian soldiers went to a bunch of wars, got betrayed by their British superiors, and went on to show that they were the best soldiers in the world even if they did misbehave at times. They also taught the rest of the world to swear properly.

And this is why Americans love Australians. -

 

[LostAlone]

Yeah the war of independence really isn't a big deal in the UK and we simply don't study it at all.

You have to see it through our eyes.

At the time of the revolution we were busy owning practically everything in the world that was worth owning. We were fighting practically everywhere constantly from about 1700 through to 1900 and while we lost a few we won most.

So while the revolution was clearly a big deal for America since you're history is kinda pathetically short and you've flourished so much since, as far as our culture is concerned, it was a tiny unimportant conflict in an unimportant colony for us.

When we study that period of histroy (late 1700's onwards) we look at the French revolution and the Napoleonic wars and not much else.

Oh and I second that we study Vietnam (and Korea come to that) in terms of 'What the hell were they thinking', which tbh is the only accurate way.

uniportent coloney you say, how about all that lumber to make your ships.

Yeah the war of independence really isn't a big deal in the UK and we simply don't study it at all.

You have to see it through our eyes.

At the time of the revolution we were busy owning practically everything in the world that was worth owning. We were fighting practically everywhere constantly from about 1700 through to 1900 and while we lost a few we won most.

So while the revolution was clearly a big deal for America since you're history is kinda pathetically short and you've flourished so much since, as far as our culture is concerned, it was a tiny unimportant conflict in an unimportant colony for us.

When we study that period of histroy (late 1700's onwards) we look at the French revolution and the Napoleonic wars and not much else.

Oh and I second that we study Vietnam (and Korea come to that) in terms of 'What the hell were they thinking', which tbh is the only accurate way.

so what was the super weapon during those times, big wooden ships, what did you need to make those big wooden ships, what nations lively hood depended on those big wooden ships, and what colony had all the wood to make those big wooden ships. unimportant righhht.

you tend to forget Europe chopped a shit load of its forest for those big wooden ships, and the Americas had a almost unending supply (relative to the need) of said lumber. if you did not control America, your navy would of bin allot smaller and so would your land holdings.

for military concerns, that unimportant American colony was like modern day middle east, you dwindled most of your natural supply of wood, and America was full of old growth perfect for the construction of ships of the line.

and keep in mind, giant old trees are the best kind of trees for big ships of the line, and Europe taped them all out.

trees were so important the England would go out into the forest and specifically mark trees to make sure the royal navy got the best of the best.

You're 5 pages late to the party bro. Read the whole thread.

 

[DSK-]

There was nothing that was studied in regards to the war for independence when I was in school. Mostly it was about the Romans, Vikings, Tudors, Battle of Hastings/William the Conqueror, Medieval britain/farming bullshit, World War 1 and 2 and the Cold War. At A level my friends were learning about Trotsky, Marxism and Stalin's rise to power.

As an arrogant comment purely of my own opinion I don't see much point in it being studied here.