Zinn Article

In this article Howard Zinn talks about how the acceptance of murder with a “hero” for the progress of one specific group of people (Columbus) . Zinn states that his viewpoint may be different than that of others, he states that “ the history of any country, presented as the history of a family, conceals fierce conflicts of interest…” When Zinn is telling the story of history he tells it from the viewpoint of the victims (Arawaks, slaves, etc.) He does not “grieve” for victims, he just chooses to view history from someone else’s’ point-of-view. Zinn does not “invent” victories for certain movements, but to simply reiterate failures of the past. In the coming years the Indians attempted to get rid of the English settlers, they were multiplying right in front of their eyes, and wanted to end it so they could save their families, communities, and tribe. They had a few massacres, until the English settlers retaliated and ultimately started a war. The English had decided that because they could not live with the Indians and could not take them as slaves they served no purpose and decided to exterminate them. According to the historian Edmund Morgan, “Within two or three years of the massacre the English had avenged the deaths of that day many times over.” The population of Indians before the English was just about 10 million, and after the extermination the population was just under a million. Not only did the English kill the Indians, some of them died from diseases (brought over by the English) and other “Natural” causes. Before the English invaded the new land, the Indians were “engaged in the great agricultural revolution…” according to Zinn. Technically Columbus did not find the “new land” he invaded a land that had a “culture that was considered complex, some of the places were populated equivalent to Europe, and where human relations were more egalitarian than in Europe” Zinn states. Zinn states that “They were people without a written language, but with their own laws, their poetry, their history kept in memory and passed on, in an oral vocabulary more complex than Europe’s, accompanied by song, dance, and ceremonial drama. They paid careful attention to the development of personality, intensity of will, independence, and flexibility, passion and potency, to their partnership with one another and with nature.”

A few questions rise when reading this article. To me they were important to talk about. In telling the history and the story of Columbus’ voyage is it right to talk about his side and his side only? The story of him being a conqueror, and how the Indians were of no help? Would mentioning that the Indians were possibly more intelligent and organized, and more agriculturally advanced than Europe ruin our history as we know it? Could we (English) have learned from the Natives of the land we took over instead of eliminating them?
These are all questions that come to my mind when reading this article written by Howard Zinn. I would have to agree with the majority of Zinn’s arguments. I find it necessary to hear the story/history from the “victims” point of view and not necessarily the conquerors point of view. Zinn mentions on pages 15 and continuing onto 16 that the Indians, specifically the Iroquois tribe was far more developed and complex than perhaps the English were. Things seemed to be run far more smoothly and organized than that of England and all of Europe. Growing up in Columbus Ohio and visiting the replica of the Santa Maria on the river front many times, I was always taught that Columbus was a hero, he discovered the Americas, and that is how we became. A vague and partially accurate statement; however there is far more than just that. In school they never teach you the brutality and why there are hardly any Native Americans in the present United States.
I really enjoyed reading this article, it made me think about the other side of the development of the new world, and made me feel a little guilty about how we became this wonderful country. I made me ask questions to my self starting with “what if” it also made me compare the attitudes of today’s society and how today we resemble the same attitudes and the selfishness of our “hero’s” in our past. Zinn opened my eyes to a whole new perspective, and possibly a perspective I enjoy learning more about.