Oxford’s Richard Carwardine is the Latest American Historian to Criticize the 1619 Project

Like James McPherson, Gordon Wood, Victoria Bynum, and James Oakes before him, historian Richard Carwardine has criticized The New York Times 1619 Project in an interview at World Socialist Web Site. Here is a taste: Q. Let me begin by asking you your reaction to the 1619 Project’s lead essay, by Nikole Hannah-Jones, upon reading … Continue reading Oxford’s Richard Carwardine is the Latest American Historian to Criticize the 1619 Project

Whose Afraid of the 1619 Project?

Interviews with historians James McPherson, Gordon Wood, and James Oakes at a socialist website are firing-up the political critics of The New York Times‘s 1619 Project.  The latest to attack the project is Max Eden of the conservative Manhattan Institute.  In his City Journal piece “A Divisive, Historically Dubious Curriculum” Eden concludes: To understand their country, … Continue reading Whose Afraid of the 1619 Project?

Civil War Historian James McPherson on the Problems with the 1619 Project

What is the 1619 Project?  Get up to speed here. Prize-winning Civil War historian James McPherson talks to Tom Mackaman at the World Socialist Website.  Here is a taste of the interview: Q. What was your initial reaction to the 1619 Project? A. Well, I didn’t know anything about it until I got my Sunday … Continue reading Civil War Historian James McPherson on the Problems with the 1619 Project

Does the 1619 Project Distort American History?

My friend Wilfred McClay has weighed in on the New York Times 1619 Project in a Commentary magazine article.  Several people have asked me to respond to it.  Here we go: When the 1619 Project hit the pages of the Times, I defended it.  I wrote several blog posts and published an op-ed in the Harrisburg Patriot-News.  That op-ed appeared in other … Continue reading Does the 1619 Project Distort American History?

Michael Gerson: Conservative reaction to the “1619 Project” is “disappointing”

If you want to get conservatives riled-up these days, just mention the “1619 Project.”  Last week I published an op-ed about the The New York Times  project designed to commemorate 400 years of slavery in America and all hell broke loose.  You can read my piece in the Harrisburg Patriot-News here. (Read some of the 155 comments). … Continue reading Michael Gerson: Conservative reaction to the “1619 Project” is “disappointing”

The 1619 Project: A “patriotism not of hagiography but of struggle”

Over at Boston Review, Princeton graduate student David Walsh wonders why the conservative view of “patriotism” is so “fragile.”  He comes up with three reasons for this: The conservative propensity for “viewing freedom and equality as incompatible.” Conservatives are invested in the “explicitly racist power arrangements that the 1619 Protect criticizes. Conservatives “revere history as a … Continue reading The 1619 Project: A “patriotism not of hagiography but of struggle”

The Attack on the 1619 Project is an Attack on Mainstream Historical Scholarship and Teaching

I am guessing, and it is only a guess, that most critics of the 1619 Project have not read much serious American history, particularly the history of American slavery and race.  Here is Jeet Heer of The Nation: I honestly don’t know how anyone can read those essays and conclude they portray the USA as “intrinsically … Continue reading The Attack on the 1619 Project is an Attack on Mainstream Historical Scholarship and Teaching

This is the Best You Will Get from the *National Review* on “The 1619 Project”

Jim Geraghty writes about everything that is missing from the story of African-American history told in The New York Times 1619 Project.  The National Review writer seems to think that the project is an African-American history textbook that must cover everything. But David French sees some merit in the project: The black American argument for liberty is … Continue reading This is the Best You Will Get from the *National Review* on “The 1619 Project”

Some Thoughts on the Opposition to the 1619 Project

We introduced readers to The New York Times 1619 Project in this post.  It now looks like there are some people who do not like the newspaper’s attempt to observe the 400th anniversary of the beginning of American slavery.  Here are a few examples: Limbaugh spent his first hour today talking about the New York Times’ new “1619” … Continue reading Some Thoughts on the Opposition to the 1619 Project

Teaching the 1619 Project

Yesterday we introduced readers to the 1619 Project, a New York Times website on the history of slavery and its legacy in America. Over at the website of the Pulitzer Center, history teachers will find tools for teaching the project. The page is loaded with lesson plans, activities, and reading guides.

*The New York Times* Introduces the “1619 Project”

Here is what it’s all about: The 1619 Project is a major initiative from The New York Times observing the 400th anniversary of the beginning of American slavery. It aims to reframe the country’s history, understanding 1619 as our true founding, and placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the … Continue reading *The New York Times* Introduces the “1619 Project”

1619 or 1620?

Historian John Turner, author of a new book on the Plymouth Colony, helps us sort this out. Here is a taste of his piece at The National Review: Some of the critics have gone so far as to propose alternative “birth years.” Last fall, the National Association of Scholars launched a 1620 project, a series of … Continue reading 1619 or 1620?

1619 or 1776?

The debate over the 1619 Project continues. What is the 1619 Project and how has the debate over its publication unfolded thus far?  Click here and read our posts. Here is Conor Friedersdorf a The Atlantic: America’s original revolutionaries, along with Abraham Lincoln, Frederick Douglass, and Martin Luther King Jr., all placed the universalist ideals of the … Continue reading 1619 or 1776?

Let’s Remember That Slavery in North America Pre-Dates 1619

The “20 And odd negroes” who arrived in Virginia in 1619 were the first slaves in English North America, but slavery existed in North American well before this.  Here is Olivia Waxman at Time: The 400th anniversary being marked this month is really the 400th anniversary of the Anglo-centric history of Africans in the U.S., says Greg Carr, … Continue reading Let’s Remember That Slavery in North America Pre-Dates 1619

The American founders practiced revisionist history

I have argued endlessly at this blog and in other writings that revisionism is the lifeblood of the historical profession. Over at The Washington Post, historian Michael Hattem reminds us that the founding fathers were also revisionists. Here is a taste of his piece, “Revisionist history is an American political tradition“: Last week, the White … Continue reading The American founders practiced revisionist history

The American Historical Association responds to Trump’s White House American History event

Here it is: On September 17, the White House announced, “In commemoration of Constitution Day, President Trump will travel to the National Archives to participate in a discussion on the liberal indoctrination of America’s youth through the 1619 Project, Critical Race Theory, and other misleading, radical ideologies with a diverse group of professors, historians, and … Continue reading The American Historical Association responds to Trump’s White House American History event