‘WRI H: Tfi‘flc ' ' I'- . ' u‘-.' ,' , ' ."5‘ x " —' ' . _ .I V .' v -. :43", .3 ‘ ‘ t. \. 66% . > ’ .-"":N ' '1‘, I ‘0 ' '1‘,‘ ' _. ‘ " , n . .' '-.'\'._’;¢ 3,, ' '3'“ ‘, - ¢ . - - -» F x. xx» - r: t :1“ . -- n‘ 'r I '. '4' . a . . v {NIH-'3.” ‘ d. . s "145:"? '0 -.-...V;-;'r~t."'.¢;-',29; "' rmugmr O "Un‘d‘c’ :3" . R bi “~51" g A. Z- “ ' n j . o | .v "~ Y"- . 1.. L; :3 H ~..4 ‘ -.q . ,‘.‘l:"‘wx fiftf'htk -_ I " can-3.. « , 2 'II _ 3V. fl'x.‘ '1' . -. €J‘. 4' IN brréiztzifiw‘ . " no Ecru; ' «1‘. .u: ' H, >. #34" -'-‘-'fi Van-2‘ - '* "H7;:**v~ gm. . u}. 2-8937“ _ “-5 ‘y‘ “4- J - v -44? . A" . »' ._ oL'u' .'- ,,. . 1'51'5‘! “a“ ‘ L.YMcoucmzd oucowom .mo_u__0m :.cozoa u_L03 sot; unecuom .mcmo_cos< och: .qummzx ooacm EOLGV .:~m_ummm_ .mc_ccoam omcowou mmO. mc_co>mm co_um_:aoa mo ommucooLoa cmo> .n ON mm om mm mm mm mm mm :m mm mm _m cm m: w: m: mm mm mm H. Ocam_u asuegaq 5591 BUTJOABJ IUBOJed 13 70‘ Spanish- World American War II 60‘ War F—‘ World 50‘ War I .— fl. l—l T—I‘. now— 4) U) .‘3 C Q) U a o. 30 i —-—1 Th! 20 . 10 1 o L. 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 Year Figure 2: Percentage of presidents' annual messages devoted to foreign affairs. ten-year average. 1870-1974. (From Bruce Russett. "The Americans' Retreat From World Power." E911119a1.5912n99 Ihuufl:ufly_90 [Spring 1975].) 14 affairs (Higham. 1965). ‘This progressive movement in historiography began in the first decades of the twentieth century. at the height of the imperial paradigm in foreign policy orientation. and was to last up to the mid-1940s--its decline coinciding with the start of the period of the Pearl Harbor paradigm. The progressive period in historiography therefore developed during a time of national self-confidence and assertiveness. when change was actively sought after rather than avoided since to most Americans change meant progress. with man himself being the agent of change. It was therefore acceptable and even neces- sary for the historian to identify and criticize societies' imperfec- tions so that improvements could be made (Skotheim. 1969). Crowe (1966) saw progressive history as largely the creation of Frederick Jackson Turner. Charles A. Beard. Vernon Parrington. and their associates and disciples. For these historians. according to Crowe. the "real" historical forces were economic and geographic. with poli- tics being a mere mask for the interplay between conflicting interest groups. May (1969) further described bankers. businessmen. and muni- tions makers as the dominant interest groups. manipulating politics in their own interest for their own economic gain and at the expense of other groups. By implication. United States government postures both at homerand abroad are mere reflections of the economic interests of this dominant group. The progressive climate of opinion of the first decades of the twentieth century was challenged in the 19305 by world events such as the rise of Facism in Italy. Communism in the Soviet Union. and Nazism 15 in Germany. and gave place to the more conservative and pessimistic mood of the post-World War II years when stability came to be valued and emphasized rather than change and conflict. and achievements rather than imperfections were celebrated (Skotheim. 1969). Hollingsworth (1962) attributed this change of mood to the disillusionment of the American people with "utopias of the left and right” and the growing prosperity and homogeneity of the populace (p. 40% The group of historians who emerged at this time belonged to the "consensus" school of United States historiography. Louis Hartz. Daniel Boorstin. Richard Hofstadter. Clinton Rossiter. John Higham. and Edmund Morgan are some of the historians generally identified as belonging to this school (84}: see Hogeboom. 1968. p. 51; Hollings- worth. 1962. p. 42; May. 1969. pp. 12-13). These men. born during World War I. reached intellectual maturity in the 19305 and 19405. when the effect of world events such as those identified above caused them to reject the more radical social thought of the progressive school. As a result of their emphasis on consensus and continuity. the consensus historians "softened the outlines and flattened the crises of American history" (Higham. 1976. p. 1460. Consensus historians have been at pains to show that a broad consensus is more characteristic of American history than conflict among interest groups. In 1962. Hollingsworth prophesied that significant national events such as the Civil Rights movement could result in a new shift in historical interpretation. 'The consensus among historiographers seems 'to be that. while the older traditional historians of the consensus 16 school still dominate the scene. younger historians such as Gabriel Kolko. Staughton Lynd. and William A. Williams. born during and after the Great Depression and reaching intellectual maturity in the Cold War years. have increasingly since the mid-19605 approached intellectual history from a radical perspective--a perspective that. in the view of Skotheim (1969). is distinctly reminiscent of the progressives of the early twentieth century in their emphasis on conflict and their sympathy for social protest. Like the earlier progressives. this group. known as New Left or Revisionist historians. see contemporary conflict as being a result of the values and goals of the United States capitalist interests. They are therefore deeply suspicious and criti- cal of all powerful institutions and ruling elites (Higham. 1970). They are also generally critical of United States government policies at home»and abroad. Like the early progressives. they believe that the role of the historian is to provide a usable past. i.e.. to use history for contemporary ends (Unger. 1967). They are far from being a homo- geneous group in their approach to United States histOry. with some of them even emphasizing consensus. However. where this is so. they see consensus as a problem rather than a unifying principle. a variable rather than a framework (Higham. 1970). On the basis of the preceding discussion. one might conclude ‘that historical writing in the United States at whatever level will reflect a perspective that may be the traditional orthodoxy of the consensus school. the radical revisionism of the Old and New Left. or a blend of the two; that this perspective will have influenced or 17 determined the questions asked. the data selected. and the interpreta- tion of the data; and that throughout the writing there will therefore be indicators of the perspective of the writer. It may be argued further that the study of direction in his- torical writing can therefore be usefully and effectively grounded in historiographical theory as outlined above. that the theory provides the indicators or symbols of direction. and that these indicators or symbols are identifiable in any piece of historical writing. .Natlona115m_and_filcbalism anthLNatlonzitate Two of the forces affecting the nation-state and international politics are nationalism and globalism. In terms of the history of the world. these two forces are relatively modern phenomena. Hayes (1961) defined nationalism as "a modern emotional fusion and exaggeration of two very old phenomena--nationality and patriotism" “x 7; emphasis mine). The term "nationality" is usually used to refer to a group of people speaking a common language. with a common historical heritage. forming a distinct cultural unit and occupying a certain defined unit of territory. Patriotism simply means love of country. Nationalism may have positive as well as negative effects. While on the one hand it embodies and promotes love and esteem for fellow nationals and devotion to the entity called nation and pride in its achievements. it often also manifests itself as a disregard for or hostility toward other groups (see Shafer. 1961. p. 3). This view was further expounded by Doob (1964) in his exploration of the 18 psychological bases of patriotism and nationalism. Doob suggested that nationalism is facilitated when an outgroup is seen to pose a threat to. to be inferior to. or to be different from the ingroup. Doob felt that nationalism is strengthened when outgroups are cast in the role of enemies. Differences between peoples are emphasized. while basic simi- larities common to all mankind are denied. minimized. or de-emphasized. This practice enables patriots to conclude that their society is supe- rior. Kohn (1961) took the discussion a stage further when he asserted that nationalism "unleashes forces which deepen antagonisms and harbors them by appeals to an idealized and over-sentimentalized past" (p. 21). Nationalism thus constitutes a serious threat to international peace. Globalism. on the other hand. is "the view of the world as a global system in which all human groups and their activities are inter- related and interdependent" (Haniff. 1977. p. 52). Whereas nationalism has been a force in domestic and international politics for three centuries. globalism is a twentieth-century phenomenon. ("Hike nation- alism. globalism seems to have little emotional appeal or permanency but is instead rooted in expediency. . . . We have become a single human community. Most of the energies of our society tend towards unity--the energy of science and technological change. the energy of curiosity and research. of self-interest and economics. the energy--in many ways the most violent of them a11--the energy of potential aggression and destruction. We have become neighbors in terms of inescapable physical proximity and instant communication. We are neighbors in economic interest and technological direction. We are neighbors in facets of our industrialization and in the pattern of our urbaniza- tion. Above all. we are neighbors in the risk of total destruc- 19 As the traditional boundaries separating the nation-states have become obscured. we have become increasingly interdependent. Globalism derives its dynamics from this feeling of mutual interdependence. Hanrieder (1978) described interdependence as a complex of "national-vertical. international-horizontal. transnational-lateral and supranational-integrative processes." He explained further that these processes form a system through which governments perform a variety of functions and that although interdependence "narrows the opportunities for national seflf-identification." nationalism continues to thrive because governments can still independently determine what structure and interactions they wish to employ in performing these functions" (p. 278). Nationalism is. therefore. alive and well. Because globalism derives its dynamics from the feelings of mutual interdependence. it emphasizes the similarities between peoples rather than the differences between them. unity rather than disunity. and equality rather than inequality. Wen Winn Both forces. nationalism and globalism. have an effect on the school. For two centuries schools as a major agency of socialization liave been expected to foster national values and loyalties through <:urriculum content. rituals. and Observances. Nationalistic education can be seen as a two-sided coin. having on one side the development of positive feelings toward one's country and on the other the development 20 of negative feelings toward other countries. ideologies. symbols. and persons considered contra-national. Billington (1966) observed that nineteenth-century textbook authors in the United States and Britain "deliberately distorted the truth to magnify the virtues of their national heroes and discredit their enemies" q» 1) and cited a number of studies of national bias in textbooks. He suggested that nationalistic bias persists in school- books but in a less overt form than formerly. Today's bias. he asserted. is less easy to detect. During the last two or three decades. schools have been called upon to "prepare future citizens for their world responsibilities" (Tewksbury. 1959. p. 360). to "develop students' understanding of the global social system" (Becker & East. 1972. p. 44). to place their social studies programs "in a world setting" (Hamilton a Patterson. 1960. p. 253). and to "lead students of all ages to a global viewpoint" (Brodbelt. 1981. p. 103). Globalism has begun to compete with nation- alism as a force affecting the school curriculum. The term "global education" originated in the United States. and the movement is at its strongest in that country. Several attempts have been made to implement global education in the schools'cmrricu- TUflL New courses are being developed. for example. on "world civiliza- tions." cultures." and old courses are being given new emphases (see Anderson. 1978. pp. 20-30). Proponents of the global education movement have argued that although national issues and systems should be examined by the young 21 and school systems should foster national spirit. world economic. social. political. and cultural interdependencies necessitate an understanding of the world systems these interdependencies have created. They have argued further that the nation-state is perhaps best examined and understood within the wider global context and have held the school responsible for balancing and correcting the media and for providing "experiences for the young which demonstrate that there are substrata to the visible event and that culture affects the percep- tion of human affairs" (Hanvey. 1979. pp. 2-3). It would perhaps be inaccurate to suggest that there is a parallel global education movement in the Commonwealth Caribbean since the manifestations are spasmodic and uncoordinated. Nevertheless. during the last two decades there have been attempts at the secondary and tertiary levels to include in the curriculum a consideration of such global issues and problems as pollution. food. dependence. and population. (See. for example. King. 1974. and King a Robinson. 1971.) One of the questions for which this investigation sought an answer was whether or not or the extent to which history textbooks of the Caribbean and the United States have become less nationalistic over time. The study also compared history textbooks of the United States and the Commonwealth Caribbean to determine which set of textbooks was 1 e55 national istic. W This study sought to determine how United States and Common- wealth Caribbean history textbooks published between 1950 and 1979 have 22 treated the subject of United States-Caribbean relations between 1895 and 1961. The first principal task was to determine the amount of ,attentign given to the subject. The second principal task was to determine the direction of the content. This is the degree to which the treatment of the subject United States-Caribbean relations in secondary school history textbooks has been similar to the treatment afforded the subject by United States revisionist or traditional historians or whether they reflect a blend of the two schools. A third task was to determine whether there have been any changes in the .context within which United States-Caribbean relations have been analyzed over time--whether global. purely national. regional. or hemispheric. The main research questions were formulated directly from the theories and assumptions discussed above and are stated here as follows: 1. Is there a difference in the treatment over time of the subject "United States-Caribbean relations" in United States history textbooks used in high schools in the United States. and in Caribbean history textbooks used in high schools in the Commonwealth Caribbean? 2. Is there a difference in the way the subject is treated in United States textbooks as opposed to the way it is treated in Carib- bean history textbooks? 3. If the answers to Questions 1 and 2 are in the affirmative. what is the nature of the difference in each case? 23 ‘ With the above considerations in mind. the following expecta- tions were phrased as hypotheses: 1. There has been an increasing amount of attention given to the subject United States-Caribbean relations in the content of United States and Caribbean history textbooks published or revised between 1950 and 1979. 2. There have been changes in the direction of the content directly reflective of historiographical trends. 3. The analysis of U.S.-Caribbean relations in a wider global context (rather than in a purely national. regional. or hemispheric perspective) has received increasing attention over time. WOW This investigation followed in the tradition of studies carried out in this century and increasingly since the Second World War. which have analyzed the treatment of foreign peoples and international rela- tions in school textbooks in use around the world. The main assump- tions of these studies have been that textbooks reflect the values of their authors and publishers. that they are a major determinant of the subject-matter content of education. and that attitudes of people of one nation toward foreign peoples are to some extent a reflection of what they have learned in school. Although textbook treatments of the relations of the United .States with other countries such as the Soviet Union. Japan. and Mexico have been investigated. a search of the literature did not reveal any studies of the treatment of United States-Caribbean relations. 24 Existing studies of the treatment of Latin America and United States- Latin America relations did. however. include some of those countries that. for the purposes of this study. were designated a part of the Caribbean area. This study therefore fills the gap that has been identified. Wm: The investigation used content-analysis procedures and was based on textbooks newly published or revised between January 1. 1950. and December 30. 1979. Six major analytical steps were followed: The first task was to measure the amount of space allotted to United States-Caribbean relations in relation to the total space of each textbook. Space allocation was determined by counting lines and converting the resulting amounts into percentages. The second task was to determine topica1_empnases in the content by measuring the amount of space allotted to selected topics or themes in each book. The third task was to analyze the treatment of the topic United States-Caribbean relations and the various subtopics in each textbook. The treatment was interpreted historiographically from two perspec- tives--traditiona1 and revisionist. The fourth task was to determine thegggntext in which the topic (and subtopics) was viewed--whether national. regional. hemispheric. or global. 25 The fifth task was to mm the treatment of United States- Caribbean relations in United States history books with the treatment in Commonwealth Caribbean history books in terms of space. emphases. and perspective. In a sixth procedure. gauge; in the treatment of United States-Caribbean relations in each period. in the textbooks of the United States and the Caribbean. were determined. Data are presented in tabular as well as narrative form where appropriate. QaflnifleuLIems In this investigation. the Qanibbean_anea was regarded as including those territories in the Caribbean Sea and those territories in Central and South America (excluding Mexico) that border the Carib- bean Sea. (See Map'L) W was used to apply specifically to those actions. reactions. and interactions that took place between the government and people of the United States and the governments and peoples of the Caribbean region defined as above. Governments of the Caribbean region may refer to governments of independent Caribbean states or the governments of those European countries that had colonies in the region and whose relations with the United States had repercussions in the region. The term "United States-Caribbean relations" also includes identifiable trends. issues. and policies that are associated with or characterize the relationship. 26 Caron UI TaheUA LLCWAITD Pvt-lo an... us I»? Anon-um: hauls US 3. .Sllmsanluous- O . . -o'. S ”Ma IT‘S-1 I: .. 'uw M —.".'.£"‘.....~""i 0.. '9‘”, CARIBBEAN SEA c ,‘ “9* 'I._.—'-". 2 . . taauamou‘ “F“H'M”;,o .“""‘°“ . "scum. . . n. _. 9-. .MIIIJ—o . i . ' “‘00 ' ~\ Map l: The Caribbean. (From W. March 1981. p. 6.) Damnation: 1. This investigation was limited to the analysis of United States and Caribbean history in high school textbooks published between 1950 and 1979. for use in the United States and Commonwealth Caribbean. respectively. This choice of national and regional history from among the various social studies courses in the high school curriculum of the United States and the Commonwealth Caribbean was based on several considerations. The study of United States history is a common experience for senior high school students in the United States since it is normally required for graduation. and next to English. Caribbean history is the most popular subject taken by Commonwealth Caribbean students. in the 27 General Certificate of Education and Caribbean Examinations Council Ordinary Level examinations. History textbooks. therefore. reach a wider audience than other social studies textbooks that may also deal with United States-Caribbean relations. There is no Caribbean govern- ment course that could be compared with the United States government course. nor is world history taught at a similar level in the Common- wealth Caribbean to that at which it is taught in the United States. However. since in the United States. United States history is normally taken in grades 11 and 12. and in the Commonwealth Caribbean. Caribbean history is taught in Forms 4 and 5 (grades 10 and 11). the two courses are comparable from the point of view of grade level. In both cases. the period covered is that from pre—Columbian times to the present. 2. The content areas in the textbooks analyzed were those sections that dealt with United States-Caribbean relations between 1895 and 1961. 3. The study did not include an analysis or description of other teaching materials such as films and slides. nor was there any consideration of teaching method or the role of the teacher. 4. The study is primarily descriptive. No attempt was made to suggest what content should or should not be included in the textbooks. or'what interpretation should be preferred. W93: This study is organized as follows. Chapter I introduced the problem. Chapter II contains a review of the relevant literature as a 28 framework within which the problem is perceived and treated. Chapter III discusses the attention given to the theme. Chapter IV the his- toriographical interpretation of the theme. and Chapter V deals with nationalistic bias in the content on the theme. In each of the Chap- ters III through V. there is a detailed description of the procedures followed. a presentation of the findings. and a concluding summary. In Chapter VI. a summary of the entire study. conclusions. and recommenda- tions are presented. GMHERII REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE This chapter contains a review of significant literature on United States history textbooks--their preparation. purposes. and function--and on the treatment in United States textbooks of the foreign relations of the United States. The chapter further examines. in outline. the treatment of Caribbean-United States relations by research historians and by school textbook authors. Its main function is to place the present study within the context of past research and commentary. which will explain and justify the selection of the analytical categories as well as of the particular hypotheses with which the study was concerned. Wen. M It would appear to be the consensus of the reviewers of United States history textbooks that the most striking characteristic of recent publications is their blandness. Writing in 1960. Alexander referred to a "gray flannel" that seemed to cover United States history textbooks and expressed concern that "a point of view by the author . . . is becoming more of a rarity as controversy is consciously avoided and the issues often artificially balanced" OL 11). It seems 29 30 also to be generally agreed that this was not always the case. but resulted from the criticisms and subsequent revisions that character- ized the 19605. Carpenter (1963) referred to "propaganda elements. indecisive national attitudes. artificial coercions and restrictions" characteristic of that particular time. which he felt engendered suspicions that "wrought changes in the writing of school history." particularly in the treatment of United States foreign relations in the twentieth century (p. 210). Certainly private interest groups. which have been increasingly vociferous. state adoption committees. publish- ers. and marketing departments all exert a heavy influence on the content of history textbooks (Downey. 1980). Since a textbook requires a major investment on the part of publishers--it being estimated that "the development of an eleventh grade history can cost five hundred thousand dollars plus an extra hundred thousand in marketing costs" (Fitzgerald. 1979. p. 45)--and since textbook production is in reality a commercial venture with annual sales in 1960 of close to 300 million dollars (Alexander. 1960. p. 13). and in which maximization of profit is perhaps the main objective. the biases. distortions. and inaccura- cies that used to occur in older textbooks have largely been removed (Janis. 1970). Krug (1970) commented that those who are familiar with the textbook publishing business know that if textbooks are to be successfully marketed to the large states with adoption boards or "approved lists"--Michigan. Ohio. Texas. Louisiana. New York. Califor- nia. and Georgia--they must be "bland. neutral and noncontroversial" (p. 300). Black (1967) cited Bill Jovanovich. President of Harcourt. 31 Brace and World (now Harcourt. Brace. Jovanovich) as saying that "keeping in mind we must be bland in language to please everyone." the editorial policy was to "look for key words or phrases that might be offensive" and delete them (p. 150). This trend was further documented in the findings of recent studies of the treatment of domestic and international history. It was decided therefore not to include an examination of textual content with the object of detecting inaccuracy. but to concentrate instead on the intellectual and ideological content of the textbooks. Although history textbooks are frequently revised. Alexander (1970) felt that the date "is no guarantee that the book is really up- to-date" (p. 12). FitzGerald (1979) felt that the academic community does not "bother the publishers."*with the result that new scholarship is extremely slow in finding its way into school texts. proceeding as it does from the academic journals via college texts. with the result that the time lag between the time when an idea or approach gains currency in academic circles and the moment it reaches the school may be 15 years or more. She also felt that there is no real check on the intellectual quality or even accuracy of the textbooks. Deconde (1969) also estimated that it takes as long as 20 years for new interpreta- tions in American history to reach the schoolbooks. If the above is the case. it should be expected that the historiographical trends this study attempted to reveal in the textbooks will run parallel to the trends (described in Chapter I) of .academic historiography and that there will be a time lag of 10 to 20 32 years between the appearance of major interpretations in academic history and their appearance in the schoolbooks. Another characteristic of United States history textbooks. which the literature seemed to suggest. is that they are essentially "nationalistic histories" (FitzGerald. 1979. p. 47). invested with. in Black's (1967) view. an "inflated sense of patriotism" (p. 99). Authors such as Graff and Krout have claimed that their aim is to inspire as well as to instruct (Palmer. 1967). while as far back as 1930. Pierce felt that most books are pro-American. This view seems to be somewhat in conflict with findings discussed above--that there has been increasingly less bias and distortion in textbooks since the desire to inspire probably encourages bias and distortion. This study therefore attempted to examine the extent to which high school history textbooks treat the subject of United States- Caribbean relations from a purely national viewpoint and in a purely national context. and to determine whether or not there is a trend toward treating the subject in a wider hemispheric or international context. Caribbean history textbooks are perhaps less bland than their United States counterparts. .Since only comparatively few textbooks exist. and since pressure groups are fewer. weaker. and less organized «and politicized. there has been less demand for revisions. Only one of the texts in the sample (the Parry and Sherlock) has been revised. and those revisions have been more for the purpose of extending the 33 coverage to include more recent history than to carry out changes in interpretation. A search of the literature did not uncover any scholarly review of Caribbean history textbooks. This writer hoped. through comparative analysis using procedures developed with respect to the analysis of United States textbooks. to lay the groundwork for further research on Caribbean textbooks. Wm 891W Reviewers of early United States schoolbooks generally have concluded that they tended to emphasize internal matters to the virtual exclusion of foreign countries and peoples and were little concerned with the relations of the United States with the rest of the world. Nietz (1961). for example. cited an earlier study of 54 United States history textbooks published before 1886. which found that the subject matter of the books did not include any consideration of the relations of the United States with the rest of the world. Nietz also reported the results of a study by Reid that analyzed 64 books published between 1882 and 1942. This study found that world relations represented only 1.1 percent of the subject matter Of the ten books published between 1886 and 1905. but that the percentage had increased significantly to 5.6 percent in the 41 books published between 1926 and 1942. These findings were further supported in Figzgerald (1979). where the viewpoint was advanced that United States history textbooks give the impression that foreign policy did not become important to the 34 United States until the 19505. with the pre—19SOs texts giving a maximum of only 1 unit in 12 to United States foreign relations. The coverage of foreign relations increased in the post-World War II era. with mid- 19505 texts giving from 15 to 20 percent of their pages to American relations with the rest of the world. Other researchers have had similar findings. West (1951). in a study of the treatment of international relations in twelfth-grade social studies textbooks published or revised from January 1. 1942. to June 1. 1951. found that the space allocated to international relations was greater than in similar texts of the mid-19205. Gilbert (1955). in a study of changes of the twentieth century in the treatment of foreign affairs since 1865 by 12 widely used United States history textbooks for the seventh and eighth grades. found that foreign affairs text material increased sharply in the 19205 and again after World War II. in both total number of lines and proportion of text. In the first instance the increase in space was 205 percent. and in the second. 168 percent. These trends have also been seen in more recent studies of the treatment of foreign countries and foreign relations with regions or individual countries. For example. Berman (1976) found that the space allotted to the Soviet Union and Communism in the content of world history textbooks rose from 1.3 percent in the period 1920 to 1933 and 5.2 percent in the period 1959 to 1970. 35 This study was designed to determine whether the trends in attention indicated here are true of the treatment of United States- Caribbean relations. In addition to looking at the attention given to foreign rela- tions. studies have also examined the nature of the content on foreign peoples and foreign relations in United States school books. i.e.. the direction of the content. FitzGerald (1979) gave a general survey of changes in the content on foreign affairs. For example. with respect to nineteenth-century school books. she made the comment that textbook authors tended to dislike foreigners and to force opinions on the reader. The Spanish are supposed to have fared particularly badly in the textbooks. She also provided information about history-textbook authors and history teachers. She noted that nineteenth-century authors of history textbooks were usually not professional historians but children's writers. and added that it was not until the twentieth century that professional historians came to be selected for writing children's history textbooks. Many authors as well as school teachers in the first decades of the twentieth century belonged to the progres- sive movement. and books tended to be ideologically diverse. If some authors were indeed progressive. and we have already noted that the dominant mode in interpretation among professional historians was the progressive. one can anticipate that somerbooks at least at this time will reflect a treatment of foreign affairs similar to that which appeared in academic monographs and textbooks. 36 According to FitzGerald. the 19405 saw both a narrowing of the ideological spectrum of the textbooks and a new interest in foreign affairs. She described them as showing "a belated concern for Europe" and manifesting "a sudden rush of enthusiasm for Latin America" (p. 53). This enthusiasm lasted apparently only as long as Franklin D. Rooseveltfls Good Neighbor Policy. Whereas earlier textbooks had used the word "imperialism" rather freely in describing United States actions in the Caribbean and the Pacific. authors now prefer to treat imperialism as a European phenomenon. and in dealing with the United States they prefer to emphasize the Good Neighbor Policy and the Monroe Doctrine. Of the 19505 texts. FitzGerald wrote that the emphasis in foreign affairs was on "how the United States became a world power" and displayed a morbid fear of Communism. They extolled the wealth. strength. and power of the United States but warned readers of the need for them to consciously and actively defend the freedoms and liberties they inherited from the founding fathers. The period was described as most challenging. Concerning the 19605 texts. FitzGerald described dramatic changes beginning with the assassination of President Kennedy. For example. late-19605 editions showed that foreign policy had been a problem for years. Other textbook reviewers corroborated some'of these findings and provided additional information. Elson (1964). for example. included in her analysis of United States schoolbooks of the nineteenth century a critique of their coverage of Latin America and commented on 37 the possible effect of that coverage on the attitudes of American children. She regretted that those children "were hardly prepared by their schoolbooks to accept their southern neighbors as equals and charged that the books tended to stereotype South Americans as "gay and indolent. a feckless people who spend most of their time on fiestas and siestas" (p. vii). Another reviewer. Pierce (1930). examined textbooks in use in the late-19205. She also was concerned about their chauvinistic nature. She wrote. "The attitudes engendered toward other peoples. through a reading of these books must. in many cases. redound to their ignominy in contrast with the glory of America.... . The Spaniard is treated as harsh and cruel" (p. 254). Pierce found that histories described the United States as being "always willing to help the dis- tressed. and as being of service in innumerable ways to the whole world" (p. 110). The forces of the United States are seen as invinc- ible. The United States is never the aggressor but must constantly defend the peace. West (1951) examined the treatment of international relations in texts published or revised from January 1. 1947. to June 1. 1951. She found in some books misleading language. omission of important data. and the presentation of only one side of a controversial issue. Sherconcluded that books are likely to do little to develop attitudes favorable to a world community. A reviewer of later textbooks. Perrone (1965) found textbooks rurt as chauvinistic as Pierce did. but felt that they had "not entirely 38 broken the barriers of imbalance. inconsistency. insensitivity and superficiality" (p. 118). A number of empirical studies shed further light on the treat- ment of foreign affairs and foreign peoples in twentieth-century United States history textbooks. Gilbert (1955) examined the emotional quali- ties of foreign affairs material in junior high school history text- books by measuring the proportion of emotional lines to total lines. He found that this proportion had decreased from 42 to 38 percent over the century. though the absolute number of emotional lines had increased. There have also been empirical studies of the treatment of United States relations with individual countries. Meredith (1968) reported favorably on the treatment of United States-Mexican relations in secondary United States history textbooks published since 1956--that only 12 instances were identified where both sides of controversial questions were not included in the textbook accounts and that content was generally accurate. With respect to Caribbean history textbooks. this study is a pioneering effort. It is therefore not possible to offer in this review any indication of how Caribbean history textbooks have treated foreign affairs. Immmmnmmm W This section attempts to describe in outline the historiography of United States-Caribbean relations. Trends in the historiography of 39 the above theme can be well illustrated by an examination of the treat- ment of subtopics of that theme. For example. historians of the major modes of United States historiography have offered interpretations of the political and military intervention of the United States in the Caribbean. which began with the Spanish-American War of 1898. Generally speaking. progressive historians gave an economic interpretation to United States imperialism (Healy. 1967). To illus- trate his argument. Healy cited the work of Nearing and Freeman. Della: Wanda. published in 1925. in which these writers claimed that the political intervention in Panama; armed intervention as took place in Santo Domingo. Haiti. and Nica- ragua; and the "acquisition without annexation." as in Cuba. were all direct results of economic penetration (Healy. 1967. pt 10). Healy also cited other progressive historians of the 19205 who found in the economics of the sugar industry an explanation for the nature of Cuban- American relations after the turn of the century. Generally speaking. consensus historians have rejected this interpretation by the progressives of the activities of the United States in the Caribbean. For Richard Hofstadter. a leading historian of the consensus school. the Spanish-American War is part and parcel of what he called "the psychic crisis of the 18905." brought on by the depression of 1893 and compounded by such events in the 18905 as the Populist movement. the free-silver agitation. and the heated campaign of 1896. Other contributing factors were the bureaucratization of American business and the disappearance of the frontier. Politicians 4O sought to distract the public by jingoism. Hofstadter therefore analyzed the war within the context of domestic social history and dismissed markets and investments as being merely "features of a situation that they do not explain at all" (p. 275). Munro (1964). another consensus historian. denied that the intervention by the United States in the Caribbean was intended to benefit its financial interests. He felt that the chief motives were political. Conditions in some Caribbean countries were such as invited .interference by European powers. This could pose a threat to national security. It was to improve these conditions that the United States intervened. Munro continued. "The Platt amendment was an effort to achieve these purposes in Cuba. and the Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine meant that the United States would seek to achieve them in other Caribbean states" (p. 348). For other consensus historians. the actions of the United States in the Caribbean were dictated by the domestic political situation. Some. for example. have thought that McKinley in going to war with Spain in 1898 was thinking mainly of his own political sur- vival (Healy. 1967). Others like Julius Pratt felt that the United States interven- tion in the Caribbean was primarily benevolent (Deconde. 1969L. Deconde reviewed the work of other consensus historians. He cited .Samuefl Bemis as contending that the policy of the United States in the region "was determined primarily by considerations of the continental republic. first in North America and then in the western hemisphere as 41 a whole" (p. 31) and mentioned that both Arthur Whitaker and J. Fred Rippy stressed the henisphere idea. Historians of the consensus school therefore have varied in their interpretation of the reasons for and the nature of United States involvement in the Caribbean. What they have in common is their rejec- tion of the use of economic considerations in explaining or accounting for the phenomena. The New Left historians. like the progressives of the early twentieth century. have emphasized economic factors in their interpre- tation of United States involvement in the Caribbean. Maddox (1972) distinguished between two groups of revisionists: the "hard" revision- ists. who stress "the expansive nature of American capitalism." and the "soft" revisionists. who emphasize "the role of individuals . . . rather than institutions" (p. 3). This study does not make such a distinction but relates to the common premise uniting both groups. i.e.. America as a capitalist-imperial ist nation seeking hegemony over the resource-rich Third World. Of William A. Williams. the senior historian of the New Left. Unger (1967) wrote: "For him the United States has always been an expansionist nation preying on its weaker neighbors. Of the Spanish-American War Williams's anti-thesis is that the war resulted from the desire of United States business interests to expand the market place" (Williams. 1969. p. 452). Williams felt that there was in the United States in that period "an overpowering imperial consensus" (p. 450). which espoused imperialism in the name of the freedom and prosperity of the country. 42 Foner (1973) saw the Spanish-American War as clearly imperial- ist and concluded that "the Cuban policy of the United States culminat- ing in the use of force against Spain had its roots in the rise of monopoly capitalism and its desire for markets." Other contributing factors such as the role of the press. humanitari an sentiments. and the influence of the ideologists of expansionism merely reinforced the economic factors. Gardner (1978) and La Feber (1978) also saw the quest for markets and investments as the dominant theme in the United States foreign policy. Was WW Elson (1964) made mention of the treatment of the Caribbean and Latin America in United States schoolbooks of the nineteenth century. She wrote. "In these books the United States is shown to deal with its southern neighbors like a benevolent godmother rather than a sibling" (p. 160) and went on to comment that "our war with Spain in 1898 is visualized largely as a humanitarian crusade to save the suffering Cubans from Spanish cruelty." Elson noted that "several books observe our loss of trade and investments in Cuba through Spanish devastation of the island." and that after the war the establishment of American protectorate over Cuba "is not a subject for question or dissent." She cited one textbook published in 1900 as saying that the people of Cuba are "very poor and densely ignorant; but they are capable of advancement under guidance. and this. it is hoped. they will receive from the United States." From Elson's study. it is possible to con- fl" *L_ _. 43 clude that late-nineteenth-century United States textbooks followed the traditional orthodox line in interpreting United States relations with the Caribbean. Pierce (1930) offered the most comprehensive review of the treatment of the above topic in United States schoolbooks of the early twentieth century. Of the Venezuelan boundary dispute she noted that books tended to play up the effectiveness of arbitration and the suc- cess of the United States in this particular example. According to Pierce. the approach generally taken by textbooks of the period with regard to the Spanish-American War was that the tyranny and selfishness of Spanish colonial policy compelled the American government to intervene in Cuba in 1898. in the interests of national security and humanity. As illustration she cited A_H1519:y_gi W by Waddy Thompson. published in l9l9. which expressed the view that The peoples of the United States could not be indifferent to the conditions in Cuba. The island lies but a little more than a hundred miles from Florida. So long as it was held by a foreign power. it might in time of war. becomeia source of danger as a base for the enemy's operations. But over and above these considerations. the American people had a genuine sympathy for the Cubans in their struggle for liberty and an abhorrence for the Spanish mode of warfare. Pierce found a few authors who discussed the influence of economic contacts as a contributing factor in the United States interest in Cuba and quoted as an example from Charles McCarthy's WWW. published in 1919 by the American Book Company: "Our country was interested in Cuba because of its situation just off our shores and later because our people had 44 invested their money in its mines. railroads and plantations" (p. 435). It would appear from Pierce's findings. therefore. that although the traditional orthodox interpretations predominated. the progressive influence was observable in a minority of textbooks. Pierce found that the P1 att amendment was treated as being of benefit to the Cubans. preserving them not only from rebellion at home but from their enemies abroad. and the author of one textbook she examined went so far as to exhort Americans to feel proud of the treatment of Cuba. which he described as being most generous. Pierce felt that textbooks in their treatment of the United States involvement in the Panama Canal were not usually open enough. Some books made no mention of United States interests in the Panama revolution. Some discussions. however. brought out the unwillingness of Colombia to sell the canal strip. the annoyance of Roosevelt because of Colombia's refusal. the desire of the people of Panama for a canal. the Panama revolt. and the presence of the United States naval forces. The value of the canal from a financial point of view was given much attention. but Pierce could only find one book that said the revolt in Panama had been directly manipulated from Washington. According to Pierce. the treatment of the protectorates (such as Cuba) by the United States was not given much attention. The establishment of protectorates in the Caribbean was explained on the basis that such action prevented hostile European powers from becoming threats to American interests. Pierce mentioned that a number of writers described the benefits that these protectorates derived from 45 their new relationship with the United States. such as good roads. the intensive production of sugar. and education. Only one book was found in which the author admitted that United States military officers had sometimes misused their powers in their management of these protector- ates. Some textbooks. however. noted that in the protectorates there was some resentment toward the United States. in some textbooks attrib- utable to the very protection they received from the United States. The Virgin Islands purchase also received some attention. In these cases. the strategic advantages of owning the islands was dis- cussed. The frequent Pan American Congresses were favorably mentioned. and the growing trade between the United States and other nations was considered an advantage to both. FitzGerald (1971) corroborated Pierce when she concluded that there were someiearly twentieth-century textbooks that were critical of United States foreign policy and that regarded the ventures of the United States in the Caribbean as imperialistic. Of the 19405 texts. FitzGerald found that they explained that "Latin American nations had certain legitimate grievances against the United States" “L 131). while in the 19505 texts. America always appeared altruistic and to have "saved Cuba from the Spanish. protected Puerto Rico and separated Panama from Columbia in order to wipe out yellow fever" (p. 128). She concluded that the texts of the first five decades of the present century did not propose any radical line of dissent. but at the same time did not call "every military venture an unqualified success." nor did they suppress information about domestic opposition to the'various 46 government initiatives UL 131). However. she did take issue with textbook authors for treating the other nations in the region only as objects of the foreign policy of the United States. In the immediate post-World War II period. therefore. the progressive element seemed to have lost influence. while the orthodox mode seemed once more almost entirely dominant. The treatment was predominantly national in per- spective. rather than hemispheric or global. This study. therefore. tried to identify the main trends in direction in textbooks published after 1950 and before 1979 in order to see how the interpretation of United States-Caribbean relations com- pared with the interpretation in earlier textbooks and to detect his- toriographical influences. It was expected that there would be changes in the direction of the content reflecting historiographical trends and that. over time. the analysis of United States-Caribbean relations in a wider global context would receive increasing attention. Sumarx This chapter examined significant literature and research on history textbooks. on the treatment of United States foreign relations in textbooks. and on the treatment of United States-Caribbean relations by both research historians and school-textbook authors. The most characteristic feature of contemporary United States history textbooks seems.to be their blandness. as reviewers have seemed 'to agree that many of the biases and inaccuracies that.characterized earlier textbooks have been removed. The main function of the history 47 textbook in the United States seems to»be to instill patriotism. Some authors reviewed seemed uneasy about this feature. as they were about the fact that school history textbooks usually fail to keep up with scholarly research in the field. The second area reviewed was the treatment of United States foreign relations in textbooks. Whereas early United States school- books gave little attention to foreign relations. the coverage on foreign peoples and foreign and international relations has increased significantly in the last three decades. The treatment of United States-Caribbean relations was the third area reviewed. The historiography of United States-Caribbean relations was presented in outline. and the literature on the treatment of the themeiin textbooks published before 1960 was discussed against this background. The feeling seemed to be that traditional interpreta- tions tend to predominate. CHAPTER III ATTENTION TO THE THEME "UNITED STATES-CARIBBEAN RELATIONS" This chapter explains the procedure used in selecting the textbooks used in this investigation. describes the procedures for determining attention. and answers the first research question--the amount of attention given to the topic of United States-Caribbean relations in the textbooks. The textbooks selected were published during three designated periods. .Qes19nat19n_9£_the_Eublish1n9_Eenlods For purposes of structuring the analysis. the textbooks were categorized by date of publication in three periods: Period 1. 1950- 1959; Period 2. 1960-1969; and Period 3. 1970-1979. Each period is designated by selected highlights of the international scene as follows: Period 1: The Cold War. Sputnik. the growth of international agencies Period 2: Cuban crisis. test-ban treaty. Vietnam. creation of new nations Period 3: Nonaligned movement. OPEC. Canal Zone Treaty. increased global awareness. pressures for a New International Economic Order 48 49 W BMW Content analysts who have tried to identify the most widely used United States history textbooks have experienced difficulty because publishing firms are reluctant to reveal sales figures (Herz. 1978). Early reviewers of senior high school United States history textbooks generally selected their sample for analysis by first identifying the population of textbooks available during the period to be studied and then submitting those lists to juries of teachers or prominent social studies educators. who then selected from the population those books that. in their opinion. were most popular. Billington (1966). for example. used three experts in the field of secondary school history teaching. whereas Weischadle'(l967) chose instead to base his selection on interviews with experienced social studies teachers. Other reviewers such as Anyon (1979) have made their selection from lists prepared by state selection boards. These procedures. though imprecise. have nevertheless yielded remarkably similar results as the same textbooks tend to recur in study after study. This study relied mainly on these earlier studies for the identification of the sample of textbooks that were reviewed. W Textbooks selected for review in this study had to meet two main criteria: (1) their popularity had to have been previously established by earlier textbook studies. and (2) they had to have revised editions in each of the three publishing periods. The latter 50 criterion was taken to indicate further the success and therefore the popularity of the books. and had the additional advantage of facilitat- ing the between-period comparison. The texts selected were those that appeared most frequently in the samples studied in ten textbook studies published between 1959 and 1979. and that also met the second criterion. (See Appendix A for list of studiesJ Of the seven most frequently appearing textbooks. two appeared on all ten lists. one appeared on nine lists. one on eight. one on seven. and the other two on five and four lists. respectively. When the second criterion was applied. two textbooks were eliminated. one because the earliest edition was in 1967. and the other because there have apparently been no revised editions since 1966. Following is a list in chronological order. by period. of the books and editions selected: Tedd. Lewis P.. and Curti. Merle. .B1se_g£_the_flmenican_uatign. New York: Harcourt. Brace and World. Inc.. 1950. Canfield. Leon H.. and Wilder. Howard B. .Ine_Making_g£_flodenn_bmenica. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin Company. 1952. Bragdon. Henry W.. and McCutchen. Samuel P. .H1519:y_9£_a_£nee_£egple. New York: The Macmillan Company. 1954. Graff. Henry F.. and Krout. John A. .Adxentune_9£_tbe_bmenlcan_flepple. Chicago: Rand McNally Company. 1959. 51 EEEIQd II' 1959-1959 Bragdon. Henry. and McCutchen. Samuel. .H15tgny_g£_a_finee_Eerle. New York: The Macmillan Company. 1961. Todd. Lewis P.. and Curti. Merle. .B1se_g£_1ne_Amenlgan_Na11Qn. New York: Harcourt. Brace and World. Inc.. 1966. Wade. Richard; Wilder. Howard; and Wade. Louise. .A_Histgny_gf_the mm. New York: McGraw-Hill. 1966.1 Graff. Henry F.. and Krout. John A. .Adxen1uLe_g£_the_AmeL19an_Eerle. Chicago: Rand McNally Company. 1968. Wade. Richard; Wilder. Howard; and Wade. Louise. .A_H1§tgny_Q£_tne .Unlted_§tates. New York: McGraw-Hill. 1972. Graff. Henry F.. and Krout. John A. .Adyentune_g£_the_Amenican_Eegple. Chicago: Rand McNally Company. 1973. Bragdon. Henry. and McCutchen. Samuel. .H1519:y_g£_a_£nee_flegple. New York: The Macmillan Company. 1973. TOdd. Lewis P.. and Curti. Merle. .B1se_g£_the_Amenican_Nat1Qn. New York: Harcourt. Brace. Jovanovich. Inc.. 1977. Various editions of the Todd and Curti book were examined in all ten textbook studies. and its popularity is well documented. Downey (1980) remarked that it is "one of the best selling secondary school history textbooksfl'and one of its editors is reported to have 1This book replaced mm: by Canfield and Wilder and incorporated much material from that book. 52 said that sales of the book were exceeding 200.000 copies in the 19605 (Black. 1967L The second most frequently appearing book. H15tgny_g£_a ‘Eree_Eerle by Bragdon and McCutchen. is reported to have sold more than two and a half million copies since 1954 (Herz. 1978). and a survey of history teaching by Baxter. Ferrell. and Wilt: (1964) found 18 percent of history teachers in Indiana using that text. The same survey found 19 percent of the teachers in Indiana using the Canfield and Wilder. W W For the textbooks in use in the Commonwealth Caribbean. it was decided to select comprehensive one-volume'histories of the Caribbean area as a whole and to exclude history textbook series of the Caribbean as well as histories of individual territories. Textbooks in series form published up to 1979 were written to be used in lower grades of high school. and national school histories are not used extensively outside of the territories about which they were written. The five Caribbean history texts that met the above-mentioned criteria and that also appeared on the suggested reading lists published by the Caribbean Examinations Council in 1972 for Ordinary Level (Grade II) students were selected. They are. in chronological order and by period: Parry: Ju and Sherlock. P. Whales. London: Macmillan. 1956. 53 Augier. F. R.; Gordon. S. C.; Hall. D. G.; and Reckord. M. Ming .Qj_1he_fle51_lnd1e§. Longman Caribbean. 1960. Garcia. A. WM. London: Harrap. 1965- Murray. R. N. .Ne1sQnL§_We§t_lnd1an_Histony. London: Nelson. 1971. Parry. J. H.. and Sherlock. P. M. W. London: Macmillan. 1971. Sherlock. P. M. .We§t_lndian_uatign§. Kingston: Jamaica Publishing House. 1973. WILLOW The remaining portion of this chapter contains a discussion of the amount of attention given to United States-Caribbean relations in the selected textbooks. Attention was determined quantitatively by measuring first the amount of space allotted to United States-Caribbean relations. Second. to identify topical emphases. the amount of space given to selected subtopics or topical categories in the content about United States-Caribbean relations was determined. Lines were used as the measure of space. W W Attention was determined by measuring the amount of content space allotted to United States-Caribbean relations in relation to the 'total content space of the textbooks. To do this. it was first 54 necessary to establish the total content pages in each textbook. Con- tent pages were taken to include all pages that contained text material and to exclude all other types of material as follows: all introduc- tory material such as tables of contents. title pages. forewords. prefaces. and unit and chapter overviews; all illustrative materials such as maps. photographs. pictures. charts. graphs. and tables; biographies; documentary material; all headings and titles; and all culminating material such as summaries. study guides. activities. bib- liographies. indexes. and appendices. After the number of content pages in each book was determined. a 20 percent sample of the pages was identified using a table of random numbers. A line count was then made of each of the pages in the sample. For ease of counting. a page-line counting guide was con- structed for each textbook.‘ (See Appendix B.) The average number of lines per page in the sample was determined by dividing the total number of lines in the sample by the number of pages in the sample. The next step was to estimate the amount of content space in the book by multiplying the average number of lines by the total number of content pages. The amount of space devoted to United States-Caribbean relations was determined by counting the number of lines devoted to the subject. These figures were then converted to percentages in relation to the total number of lines in each book. By way of illustration. the II am indebted to Berman (1976) for this device. 55 results of this procedure in respect of one textbook is attached as Appendix C. Intracoder reliability (ixa. the consistency through time of the coding of a single researcher or group of researchers) was checked by repeating the procedure for determining the amount of space devoted to United States-Caribbean relations several months later. Pearson product-moment. a correlation technique. was used to compare the old and new totals for 27 subtopics on the theme of United States-Caribbean relations. The book used was the 1961 edition of the Bradgon and McCutchen. A coefficient of .966 indicated that the results were consistent. To determine the topical emphases and balance within the content. the content was first divided into five topical categories as follows:1 The Spanish-American War (Span. Am. War) United States intervention in the Caribbean (U.S. Interven.) The Good Neighbor Policy (Good N. Pol.) United States colonial government (U.S. col. govt.) Pan-Americanism and hemispheric defense (Pan.Am.hem.def.) The total number of lines on each category was then determined. and the percentages of the total coverage on United States-Caribbean relations that these totals represented was calculated. 1For a further breakdown of content included within these categories. see Appendix D. 56 WW: WM: Tables 2. 3. and 4 summarize the findings of this investiga- tion. Perhaps the most significant finding is that there was very little variation among United States history textbooks both within periods and between periods in the amount of space allotted to United States-Caribbean relations (see Table 2). Table 2.--Tota1 percentage of space in United States history textbooks allotted to United States-Caribbean relations. by textbook and period. Space Allotted Period Textbook No. of Lines Percent l Tedd a Curti 1950 1.39B.3 3.3 1950-59 Canfield & Wilder 1952 1.335.5 3.5 Bragdon & McCutchen 1954 979.5 3.1 Graff a Krout 1959 1.209.8 3.7 Period total 4.920.l 3.4 2 Bragdon & McCutchen 1961 985.3 3.4 1960-69 Todd & Curti 1966 1.247.8 3.3 Wade. Wilder & Wade 1966 l.239.8 2.9 Graff a Krout 1967 1.415.0 4.1 Period total 4.887.9 3.5 3 Wade. Wilder a Wade 1972 1.228.8 2.9 1970-79 Graff a Krout 1973 1.4ll.8 4.1 Bragdon & McCutchen 1973 1.167.8 3.4 Tedd & Curti 1977 1.031.0 2.5 Period total 4.839.4 3.1 Total for all periods l4.647.4 3.3 57 The range from least to most attention within each period was very small (see Table 3). even though it became wider over time. An examination of the coverage of the topic in each textbook over the three periods revealed that in the case of two. the Todd and Curti and the Canfield and Wilder/Wade. Wilder. Wade. the coverage became less over time. whereas the coverage in the other two became greater (see Table 4). Table 3.--Range in amount of space given to United States-Caribbean relations. by period.a Period Range (in Percent) —I no O‘NO‘ aRange--the largest amount of space in a textbook minus the least amount of space in a textbook within each period. Table 4.--Difference between Period 3 and Period 1 in the percentage of space allotted to United States-Caribbean relations. by textbook. Textbook Difference (in Percent) Todd and Curti -.8 Canfield and Wilder/Wade. Wilder. Wade Bragdon and McCutchen Graff and Krout + + 1 #14401 58 Since the average percentage for all periods was as low as 3.3. such increases and declines as are shown in Table 3 are of some sig- nificance. The decrease in coverage was greatest in the case of the Tedd and Curti. with the percentage declining from 3.3 percent in the 1950 and 1966 editions to 2.5 percent in the 1977 edition. A detailed examination of the coverage in these editions revealed that although the 1966 edition added a total of 110.5 lines on recent events--the Bay of Pigs. the Missile Crisis. and the Alliance for Progress--it reduced the coverage on all of the topics that had appeared in the 1950 edi- tion. The result was a reduction in the total number of lines on United States-Caribbean relations even though new content had been added and even though the percentage of space allotted to the themes remained the same. Even more severe pruning took place with respect to the 1977 edition. resulting in a more drastic reduction in the number of lines and a decided lowering of the percentage figure. A similar trend was found when the coverage in the Canfield and Wilder/Wade. Wilder. and Wade was analyzed except that the most severe pruning took place with the 1968 edition. As with the Todd and Curti. both the total number of lines and the percentage allotted to United States-Caribbean relations declined. With the two texts that showed an increase over time. both the total number of lines and the percentage figure increased over time. 59 WW W549 WW Commonwealth Caribbean history textbooks were similarly ana- lyzed. Table 5 summarizes the findings. Table 5.--Total percentage of space in Commonwealth Caribbean history textbooks allotted to United States-Caribbean relations. by textbook and period. Space Allotted Period Textbook No. of Lines Percent 1 Parry & Sherlock 1956 991.3 9.0 1950-59 Period total 991.3 9.0 2 Augier. Gordon. Hall & 1962-69 Reckord 1960 504.0 5.5 Garcia 1965 251.3 2.6 Period total 755.3 3.9 3 Murray 1971 259.0 6.3 1973-79 Parry & Sherlock 1971 1.048.8 8.9 Sherlock 1973 386.0 3.8 Total for all periods 3.440.4 6.1 A between-period comparison of the’coverage in Caribbean his- ‘tory textbooks was less reliable than a similar comparison of United States history textbooks. This is because the number of books in each period varied. and only one textbook occurred in more than one edition. It was. therefore. decided not to construct tables to show the 6O between-period range and difference in the amount of space allotted to United States-Caribbean relations. The most interesting finding here was that Commonwealth Carib- bean history textbooks tended to devote a higher percentage of space to United States-Caribbean relations than did United States history text- books. It seems safe to conclude. therefore. that the theme of United States-Caribbean relations loomed larger in Caribbean history textbooks than in United States history textbooks (see Table 6% Table 6.--Percentage of space allotted to United States-Caribbean relations in United States and Commonwealth Caribbean history textbooks. by period. Space Allotted Period United States Textbooks Caribbean Textbooks 1 3.4 9.0 2 3.5 3.9 3 3.1 6.5 Average for all periods 3.3 6.1 W The amount of space allotted to topical categories in the content on United States-Caribbean relations was determined by counting the number of lines allotted to each of the five categories. Table 7 shows the results in percentages for each book and for the periods. 61 00.000.0 0.00. 0.0 0.0. 0... 0.0 0.00 0.00 .0000 00.000 00.0.... 0.00. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0. ..00 0.00 000.0 0 00000 . 000. 00.000.. 0.00. ... 0.0. 0.0. 0.0 0..0 0.00 000: 0 000..3 .0003 000. 00.000.. 0.00. 0.0 0.0. 0.0. 0.0 0.00 0.00 .0000 0 0000 000. 00.000 0.00. 0.0 0.00 0.0. 0.0 0.00 0.0. 00000000: 0 0000000 .00. 0 00.000.0 0.00. 0.0 .... 0.0. 0.0 0.00 0.00 .0000 00.000 00.000.. 0.00. 0.0 0.. 0.0 0... 0.00 0.00 00000 0 .0000 00.000 0.00. 0.0 0.00 0.0. 0.0 0.00 0.0. 00000000: 0 0000000 000. 00.000.. 0.00. ... 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 L00..3 0 0.0.0000 000. 00.000.. 0.00. 0.0 0.0. 0... 0.0 0.00 0.00 .0000 0 0000 000. . w .mmm_oc: .E< .u>oo >0..0¢ .co>LOuc. cm: moc_4 mo .muOP m .cmm ..ou .z coca .m.: .E< .am xoonuxOF 00.000 .02 _muo._. >Lom00mu .uo_coa new xooauxo» >0 .m:o_um_OL cmona_cmunmoumum emu—c: co accucou ecu c. mo_LOmOHmu Cu neuuo__m meOnuxOu >LOum_; neumum 000.c3 :— oumam mo ommucoucoanu.n 0.000 62 .>mco>000:09 m__OP mEmcmm 020 can .mmm. mo co_u:_o>om cmnau ecu .mccm_m_ c.m0_> 000 00 00000030 onumrzwco.m.mmm_uca 000000000 0cm no.0omOumu o>.u on» 00 0000 mm coacaoo 00: mu.aorm 00.000... 0.00. 0.0 0.0. 0.0. 0.0 0.00 0.00 000.000 ..0 000 .0000 00.000.0 0 00. 0.0 0.0. 0... 0.0 0.00 0.00 .0000 00.000 00..00.. 0.00. 0.0 ..0. 0.0. ..0 0.00 0.00 .0000 0 0000 000. 00.00... 0.00. 0.0 0.00 ..0. 0.0 0.00 0.0. 00000000: 0 0000000 000. 00...0.. 0.00. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0. 0.00 0.00 00000 0 00000 000. 00.000.. 0.00. 0.0 0.0. ..0. 0.0 0..0 0.00 0002 0 000..3 .0003 000. 0 N .mmm_oc: .E< .u>ou >o__om .co>couc_ 0m: .wu0nw0wm .0000 0 .000 ..00 .z 0000 .0.0 .0< .00 .0000x00 00.000 >LOmOUmu .0000.0000--.0 0.000 63 Table 8 summarizes the results from Table 7 by period totals only. and Table 9 gives the ranking of the categories based on these results. Table 8.--Percentage of space in United States history textbooks allotted to categories in the content on United States- Caribbean relations. by period. Category TOtal No. Period Sp. U.S. of Lines Am. Inter- Good N. 001. Pan. Un- TOtal War vention Policy Govt. Am. class. 2 1 25.5 38.9 7.2 14.4 11.1 2.9 100.0 4.920.00 2 25.6 39.7 7.2 11.8 12.4 3.3 100.0 4.887.75 3 24.5 39.5 7.2 11.5 12.5 4.8 100.0 4.839.25 A11 periods 25.2 39.4 7.2 12.6 12.4 3.2 100.0 14.647.00 Table 9.--Ranking of categories in United States textbooks according to amount of space allotted. by period. Rank Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 All Periods 1 U.S. Interven. U.S. Interven. U.S. Interven. U.S. Interven. 2 Sp. Am. War Sp. Am. War Sp. Am. War Sp. Am. War 3 Col. Govt. Pan Am. Pan Am. Col. Govt. 4 Pan Am. Col. Govt. Col. Govt. Pan Am. 5 Good N. Pol. Good N. Pol. Good N. Pol. Good N. Pol. The most significant finding that emerged was perhaps that the first two categories. the Spanish-American War and United States Inter- vention. were the dominant ones and accounted for over 60 percent of 64 the content on United States-Caribbean relations throughout all periods. (See Tables 9 and 10.) The Good Neighbor Policy received least attention in all periods. The similarity in coverage between periods and even between textbooks was remarkable. The Bragdon and McCutchen was the only textbook that departed significantly from the general pattern in that consistently throughout the three periods it devoted less attention to the Spanish-American War than did the others and rather more to Pan Americanism. There have. therefore. been no significant changes of emphasis in the content on United States- Caribbean relations over time. Table 10.--Percentage of space in United States history books allotted to two categories--the Spanish-American War and United States Intervention. in the content on United States- Caribbean relations. by period. Period Percent of Space to Two Categories 1 64.4 2 65.3 3 64.0 All periods 64.6 W W Table 11 shows the results of this research. while Table 12 summarizes the content from Table 11. by period totals. Table 13 gives 65 00.0.0.0 0.00. 0... 0.0 ..00 0.0 0.00 0.0. 000.000 ..0 000 .0000 00.000.. 0.00. ..0. 0.0 0.00 0.. 0.00 0.0. .0000 00.000 00.000 0.00. 0.0. 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.. 000.0000 000. 00.000.. 0.00. 0... 0.. ..00 0.0 0.00 0.0. 000.0000 0 0000. 00.000 0.00. ..0. 0.0. 0..0 0.0 0.0 0.00 00000: .00. 0 00.000 0.00. 0.0. 0.. 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0. .0000 00.000 00..00 0.00. 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.0 ..0. 0.00 0.0000 000. 00.000 0.00. 0..0 0.. ..00 0.0. 0.00 0... ..0 00 000000 .00.000 000. 0 00..00 0 00. 0.0 ..0. 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0. .0000 00.000 00..00 0.00. 0.0 ..0. 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0. 000.0000 0 00000 000. . N .mmm_oc: .E< .u>oo >0..0¢ .co>000c_ 0m: .mu0nw0wm .0000 0 000 ..00 .z 0000 .0.0 .00 .00 00000000 00..00 >LomOumu .uo_0oa ucm xoonuxou >0 .mco.um_O0 among—.muumoumum 000.0: :0 0:00:06 020 c. 00.00m0006 cu ceauo__m meOnuxOu >0000_; among—Emu c. 06000 00 emmucoucomnn.__ p.000 66 the ranking of the categories based on these results. The most striking finding here was that the Colonial Government category was predominant. receiving 41.8 percent of space when the average for all periods was calculated (see Tables 12 and 13). TherGood Neighbor Policy and Pan Americanism received very little attention. while the other three categories taken together accounted for more than three- quarters of the space (see Table 14). Table lZ.--Percentage of space in Caribbean history textbooks allotted to categories in the content on United States-Caribbean relations. by period. Category Total No. Period Sp. U.S. of Lines Am. Inter- Good N. Col. Pan. Un- TOtal War vention Policy Govt. Am. class.a % 1 15.4 24.2 2.5 43.5 10.1 4.3 100.0 991.25 2 19.2 22.6 6.8 34.6 1.3 15.5 100.0 755.25 3 15.3 22.4 1.5 44.5 2.2 14.1 100.0 1.693.75 A11 aTopics not included under the five categories include Garveyism. tourism and the banana trade. farm labor. communication. and the Cha- guaramas dispute. 67 Table l3.--Ranking of categories in Caribbean textbooks according to amount of space allotted. by period. Rank Period l Period 2 Period 3 All Periods l Col. Govt. Col. Govt. Col. Govt. Col. Govt. 2 U.S. Interven. Sp. Am. War Sp. Am. War U.S. Interven. 3 Sp. Am. War U.S. Interven. U.S. Interven. Sp. Am. War 4 Pan Am. Good N. Pol. Pan Am. Pan Am. 5 Good N. Pol. Pan Am. Good N. Pol. Good N. Pol. Table l4.--Percentage of space in Caribbean history textbooks allotted to three categories. Colonial Government. the Spanish- American War. and U.S. Intervention. in the content on United States-Caribbean relations. Period Percent of Space to Three Categories l 83.1 2 76.4 3 82.2 All periods 8l.3 The balance in coverage between categories over the three periods was not as even as was the case with the United States history textbooks. Table l3 shows more changes in rank between the categories than does Table 9. but these are not very significant. and the Colonial Government category was consistently number one. The ranking in Period 3 was the same as in Period 1 except that the Spanish-American War and the United States Intervention categories changed places. There has. therefore. been little change in emphasis over time. 68 Tables l5 and 16 were constructed to facilitate comparison between United States and Caribbean textbooks. They show that emphases differed. 'The Caribbean texts emphasized United States relations with its colonies and protectorates (the Colonial Government category). while United States textbooks emphasized United States Intervention and the Spanish-American Nan. The Good Neighbor Policy received least emphasis in both sets of books. Table lS.--Percentage of space in United States and Caribbean textbooks allotted to categories in the content on United States- Caribbean relations. by period and category. Space Allotted Period Category United States Books Caribbean Books 1 Sp. Am. War 25.5 l5.4 U.S. Interven. 38.9 24.2 Good N. Pol. 7.2 2.5 Col. Govt. 14.4 43.5 Pan Am. 11.1 10.1 Unclass. 2.9 4.3 2 Sp. Am. War 25.6 19.2 U.S. Interven. 39.7 22.6 Good N. Pol. 7.2 6.8 Col. Govt. ll.8 34.6 Pan Am. 12.4 1.3 Unclass. 3.3 l5.5 3 Sp. Am. War 24.5 lS.3 U.S. Interven. 39.5 22.4 Good N. Pol. 7.2 1.5 Cbl. Govt. 11.5 44.5 Pan Am. l2.5 2.2 Unclass. 4.8 l4.l 69 Table l6.--Percentage of space in United States and Caribbean history textbooks allotted to topical categories in the content on United States-Caribbean relations. by category. Sp. Am. U.S. Good N. Col. Pan Textbook Nar Interven. Pol. Govt. Am. Unclass. U.S. 25.2 39.4 7.2 12.6 l2.4 3.2 Caribbean l6.2 23.0 3.0 42.l 4.3 ll.4 Summ The main objective in this chapter was to investigate the amount of attention given to the theme and also the nature of that attention over time. In carrying out the investigation. three publishing periods were established: 1950-59. l960-69. and l970-79. Four history books of the United States were analyzed in each of the three periods. 0f the six Caribbean books. there was one in Period 1. two in Period 2. and three in Period 3. Attention was determined by first measuring the amount of space allotted to United States-Caribbean relations. in relation to the total space in each book. Lines were used as the measure of space. The total space of each textbook was determined by counting the lines in a random sample of content pages. establishing the average number of lines per page. then multiplying this figure by the total number of content pages. The result was an estimated total number of lines. Five categories were then identified in order to determine topical emphases in the content. The lines allotted to each category were 70 counted and converted to percentages of the total space on United States-Caribbean relations. One of the hypotheses of this study was that an increasing amount of attention has been given to the theme of United States- Caribbean relations in the content of United States and Caribbean history textbooks over time. The findings were not very conclusive. With respect to the United States books. although the period total for the third period was lower than that for the first period. when individual texts were examined. two showed a decrease in coverage of the theme over time. while two showed an increase. No between-period comparison of the Caribbean books was attempted as the number of books in each period varied and only one book occurred in more than one edition. It was found. however. that Caribbean books tended to devote a higher percentage of space to United States-Caribbean relations than did United States textbooks. When the categories were examined. it was found that there has been no appreciable change of emphasis in the content on United States-Caribbean relations in either United States or Caribbean books over time. However. United States textbooks and Caribbean textbooks differed in the categories they emphasized. CHAPTER IV THE HISTORIOGRAPHICAL INTERPRETATION OF UNITED STATES- CARIBBEAN RELATIONS This chapter is concerned with determining the direction of the content on United States-Caribbean relations in United States and Commonwealth Caribbean high school history textbooks published between l950 and l979.1 The approach adopted is based on the premise that the direction of the content of historical writing may be determined by analysis of the interpretation of historical data. Ihe.H1stoI1QaIa2hx.Qi_un1tsd_States:§an1bbean.Belations In carrying out this investigation. only one portion of the historiography of United States-Caribbean relationswas included and consulted--that was the historiography in English-~and from that por- tion has included the work of both United States and Caribbean his- torians. With respect to content on United States-Caribbean relations in United States historiography. the interpretation may be classified under two main historiographical modes--the traditional/orthodox 1Generally speaking. direction in content analysis refers to the attitude toward any symbol by the user. whether pro. con. or neu- tral. Direction as used in this chapter refers to the historiographi- cal interpretation of selected issues in high school textbooks. whether traditional or revisionist. or a blend of the two. 71 72 consensus mode--the dominant mode in United States historiography. and the revisionist mode--whether of the progressive historians of the early twentieth century or of the more recent New Left historians. A third mode may be identified. the eclectic. which presents a synthesis of the two main modes. The same modes may be identified in Caribbean historiography. the dominant mode being the traditionaL. There has been a tendency for Caribbean historians particularly in the early twentieth century to follow the lead of scholars from the United States and other developed countries. .As in other things. there is wide variation between the territories of the Caribbean in the relative strength of the different modes. For example. revisionism seems to be strongest and to have existed for a longer time in those territories that have experienced a United States military occupation. whereas in those territories that have not shared this experience. revisionism is relatively new and weaker. Methodology Three main procedural steps were followed: 1. The first step was to identify and select a number of controversial topics/themes in the history of United States-Caribbean relations with respect to the period from 1895 to the Second World War. A study of the historiography of United States-Caribbean relations identified the maJor research historians belonging to the various modes. It was also possible to select from the same sources those topics/ themes in United States-Caribbean relations during the period 1895 to 73 1939 that appear to have stimulated the greatest amount of controversy. They are as follows: The Spanish-American War Intervention and Dollar Diplomacy The Good Neighbor Policy Following is a brief summary of each of the above themes: Wm]: This war marked the culmination of Cuba's 30-year struggle against Spain. The United States came into the war on the>side of Cuba against Spain following the destruction of the battleship u5§_flain§ in 1898. In less than four months the United States had destroyed the Spanish fleet and occupied Cuba and Puerto Rico in the Caribbean as well as Guam and the Philippines in the Pacific Ocean. By the Treaty of Paris. which ended the war. Spain ceded Puerto Rico to the United States and evacuated Cuba. which became a protectorate of the United States. W Egaé2EEgin19mi§¥_1n.Ih§.Qi£1hQ§in; During this period. Marines and dollars became the main instruments of United States foreign policy in the Caribbean. Between 1906 and 1917. the United States intervened in Cuba. the Dominican Republic. Haiti. Honduras. and Nicaragua. (The Platt Amendment of 1901 declared that it was the right of the United States to intervene militarily in CubaJ Military interventions were usually Justified by 74 reference to the Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine announced by Theodore Roosevelt in 1904. According to this Corollary. the United States would. if necessary. exercise police power in Latin America and the Caribbean. The first occasion for police action occurred when the Dominican Republic was threatened with foreclosure by her European creditors. The United States set up a customs receivership to collect the revenues and discharge the debts. Taft. Roosevelt's successor. extended his pol icy and advocated a variation known as Dollar Diplomacy. This involved obtaining finan- cial controls to ensure that debts were paid and that United States business interests were promoted. WW Beginning in the 19305. there was a noticeable shift in United States policy toward Latin America and the Caribbean. .A series of acts implemented this policy. In 1930. the Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine was officially repudiated by the State Department. In December 1933. Secretary Hull signed a treaty at Montevideo to the effect that "no state has the right to intervene in the internal or external affairs of another)‘ In keeping with this treaty. the Platt Amendment was abrogated in the following year. The Marines were withdrawn from Haiti. and the customs receivership in the Dominican Republic was ended. A new treaty with Panama gave that country a larger annuity for the Canal Zone. Then. at the Buenos Aires Peace Conference of 1936. Roosevelt promised to consult with Latin American 75 nations "for mutual safety)’ This policy had the desired effect of increasing Pan American solidarity. 2. ‘The second procedural step was to analyze the treatment of the selected topics/themes by research historians of the United States and the Caribbean to determine the most comnxuiinterpretations (with respect to each of the above topics) that may be attributable to each mode. These interpretations are summarized in Tables 17 through 19. Table l7.-—The historiography of the Spanish-American War. Interpretation Research Question Consensus Revisionist 1. Who was most -not big business -elite businessmen responsible for -big business was and government the United States opposed officials involvement in -public opinion was -government. military the war? responsible and business -an imperialist clique was responsible 2. How did the United -by accident--the -the involvement was States come to be U.S. stumbled into rationally and involved in the war? the war deliberately planned 3. Why did the United -manifest destiny -to secure foreign States become -missionary zeal markets. outlets for involved in the -Social Darwinism surplus production war? -hunger for foreign and sources of raw ventures materials -racism and national- ism -defense of projected canal -protective imperialism 76 Table 18.--The historiography of United States Intervention and Dollar Diplomacy. 1900-1921. Research Question Interpretation Consensus Revisionist 1. Who was mainly responsible for the policy? -not private interests -government officials -U.S. business inter- ests 2. What was the pur- pose of the policy? -secure approaches to the canal -safeguard strategic interests of the U.S. -to help the people of the area -not to profit private interests -promote peace and good government in the Caribbean -not to protect the canal -desire for order -expand trade and cultural influence -to gain access to markets. raw mate— rials -promote investment -support big business 3. What was the nature of the policy? -assistance. not exploitation -extension of U.S. economic and politi- hegemony 4. What were the main effects of the policy on the Caribbean? -Caribbean enjoyed a variety of social and economic bene- fits. e.g.. improved infrastructure -negative economic. social and political effects. 9.9.. increasing depend- ency 77 Table 19.--The historiography of the Good Neighbor Policy. Research Question Interpretation Consensus Revisionist 1. How did the policy originate? -post-Versailles feeling of security -altruism of U.S. -inherent anti- imperialism of the U.S. -creation of local armed forces by the U.S. and the emerg- ence of pro-U.S. dictatorships made military interven- tion unnecessary 2. What purpose did the policy serve? -promotion of U.S. security interests -advancement of civi- lization -solution of domestic economic problems -promotion of sta- bility in order to bring U.S. capital into the region -promotion of U.S. hegemony 3. What was the nature of the policy? -increased economic and social well- being of the nations of the new world -support for authori- tarian regimes and elites favorable to the U.S. -emphasis on prevent- ing disorder -political interven- tion. e.g.. through use of diplomatic recognition -interference with electoral system -reciprocal trade agreements 78 Table l9.--Continued. Interpretation Research Question Consensus Revisionist 4. What were the -peace. stability. -increased U.S. main effects of prosperity to new investment with the policy? world nations negative effects on -social and economic economy and society development of client states -the leadership in many states became mere extensions of U. S. power -increased U.S. hegemony 3. The third procedural step was to analyze the treatment of the selected topics/themes in United States and Commonwealth Caribbean high school history textbooks. The aim at this stage was to discover whether there had been changes in interpretation of the topics/themes over time and whether these changes were directly reflective of or comparable to historiographical trends. and to identify possible simi- larities and differences between interpretative trends identified in the United States high school history textbooks with those identified in Commonwealth Caribbean history textbooks. WW Paterson (1973) identified three questions on the Spanish- American War that appeared in his view to have aroused the greatest controversy among United States historians. The first problem is a 79 problem of political process. and the question that arises from this is whether the impulse toward imperialism came from "an aroused popular will" that "compelled reluctant leaders toward empire." or whether it came from an elite holding decision-making authority and/or an influen- tial pressure group that shaped public opinion. In other words. who was responsible? The second question identified by Paterson is whether the U.S. became an imperial power by design or by accident--whether the impetus toward imperialism arose merely as an "ill-considered spur of the moment response to explosive events and popular ideasfl'or whether it came about as a result of "a careful assessment of the American national interestfl A third problem centers on motivation. Paterson listed a number of possible motives that have been advanced to explain United States imperialism: "nationalism. with its components of pride. duty. superiority. and prestige; humanitarianism; economic necessity and ambition; domestic unrest. Social Darwinism; Manifest Destiny; the restlessness of an adventuresome generation that had not participated in a war; international competition; or the perceived need for naval and strategic stationsfl'and asked. "which of these motives. or combination of motives. were most significant?" (p. 2). United States historians of the consensus school and those associated with the revisionist school have differed in their answers to these and other questions. Although it is not possible to classify their various answers into rigid classes. a fairly general classifica- tion of the various responses can be made. 80 Consensus historians have usually been united in the view that United States business was not responsible for the Spanish-American War (e.g.. see Bemis. 1943. p. 137). Pratt (1936) went as far as saying that United States businessmen were either "opposed or indifferent to the expansion philosophy which had arisen since 1890" and for many. "the threat of war was like a spectre at a feast" (pp. 233-39). Pratt blamed the American public for the war. while another consensus his- torian concluded that the war was "a people's war not an administration war. not the work of politicians" (Bemis. 1943. p. 36). Leuchtenburg (1957) and Hofstadter (1967) ascribed the same role to public opinion as did Pratt. According to Leuchtenburg. America was driven to a declaration of war by the pressure of feverish public opinion influ- enced by unscrupulous journalism and conspicuous episodes such as the sinking of the Maine. while for Hofstadter the main influence on public opinion was what.he referred to as a "psychic crisis."‘which arose from the economic depression and domestic social disorders that the United States was then experiencing. Beale (1956) also saw public opinion as playing a dominant role in United States foreign policy at the time. but for him the main shaping force was the imperialist clique clustered around Roosevelt. which influenced a weak president:l For consensus historians the war was almost an accident. for example. both Kennan (1951) and Osgood (1953) attested to the 1Some historians have perceived McKinley as having been a weak president. 81 mindlessness of the war. and Leuchtenburg explained how America stum- bled headlong into a war in which no vital American interest was involved. and with little regard for the consequences. Consensus historians have differed among themselves in their analysis of the motives that. in their view. led the United States into war with Spain. Leuchtenburg (1957) described the United States of the 18905 as being "aggressive. expansionist and jingoistic" and identified the Protestant and democratic forces of the South and West as the main warmongers. For Beale (1956). the underlying motives of the clique that in his view was mainly responsible for the war were nationalism and racism. while for Pratt (1936). missionary zeal was an additional factor to be considered. Bemis (1943) referred to what he described as "protective imperialism" when analyzing United States-Caribbean policy at the turn of the century and opined that the focus of this protective imperialism was "on the defense of an Isthmian canal in a passageway between the two seacoasts of the Continental Republic. vital to its naval communications and to its security" (p. 140). ‘For consensus historians. therefore. the motives seemed to center on national interest and benevolence. The revisionists have differed from consensus historians in ascribing the main responsibility for America's involvement in the war to business interests in the United States. La Faber (1963). McCormick (1961). and W. A. Williams (1962) all saw elite business interests as sharing this responsibility with government officials and popularizers such as Admiral Mahan. According to revisionist historians. these 82 groups deliberately. consciously. and rationally formulated the American imperialist position because they felt that foreign markets were needed to absorb the surplus domestic production of the United States. La Feber (1963) strongly denied the consensus assertion that the United States set out on "an expansionist path in the late 18905 in a sudden spur-of-the—moment fashion" or that they acquired an empire "during a temporary absence of mind" or had "the empire forced upon them" (p. viii). On the contrary. suggested another revisionist. with the development of monopoly capitalism. the United States "consciously initiated a broad program of sophisticated imperialism" based on the premise that "overseas economic expansion provided the 51ng_gua_non of domestic prosperity and social peace" (W. A. Williams. 1966. p. 355). This view was further supported in Nearing and Freeman (1925). where the authors described the three lines of expansion followed by the United States since it reached the stage of financial imperialisnu One direction was the search for raw materials and supplies for the domes- tic industry. another was the search for markets for surplus products. and a third was the search for business opportunities overseas. According to Lane (1972). revisionist scholarship has seemed to regard the acquisition of "colonies" or protectorates by the United States at the turn of the century as means to an end rather than an end in itself--the end being the establishment of markets to absorb the sur- plus produce of United States farms and factories and the safeguarding of American markets and trade routes. 83 A study of the work of traditional academic historians of the Caribbean revealed that they were largely indistinguishable from their United States counterparts in the questions they asked. the sources they used. the answers they found. and even surprisingly enough in perspec- tive. This finding was supported by Cobbitt (1963). who found that as late as 1927. Cuban school texts and academic histories treated the 1898 war in much the same way as United States textbooks. and he even cited a Cuban historian. Cosme de la Torriente. who had expressed doubts about the ability of the Cuban army to defeat the Spanish forces without the assistance of the United States Navy. .At this time apparently Cuban historiography was dominated by the conservative Academy of History (Smith. 1964). Caribbean revisionist interpretations of United States- Caribbean relations predate United States revisionism. and Caribbean revisionists have had a uniquely Caribbean perspective. Apparently as early as the 19805. Cuban scholars had taken issue with traditional American historiography on key elements such as the nature of American objectives. Cuba's role in the defeat of Spain. and the accomplishments of the military occupation (see Perez. 1982. pp. 176-77). Smith (1964) described Cuban revisionism as being a tendency among intellectuals to "explain Cuba's troubles in terms of capitalism and Yankee imperialism" and noted that as a result "economic factors and the policies of therUnited States government emerged as important themes in Cuban historical writing" (p. 48). In Smith's view a number of factors created Cuban revisionism--the United States occupation in 84 1906-08. the landing of United States Marines in 1912. the intervention of 1917. the growing control of the Cuban economy by United States businessmen. the role of the United States in the Machado dictatorship. and the failure of the 1933 revolution. Smith cited a number of Cuban historians to support his claims. One was Herminio Portell Vila. who asserted that the United States would have lost the war without Cuban help. and documented the annexationist sympathies of General Wood linking these to the establishment of the protectorate under the Platt Amendment. Another was Emilio Roig de Leuchsenring. who further devel- oped the theme that the Cubans won their own independence. Apparently Roig has insisted that the struggle for independence was not a series of wars but one continuous struggle of 30 years duration. that the United States government had consistently opposed Cuban independence though some Americans favored it. that when the United States entered the war Spain had already been defeated by the Cuban patriots. that after the United States entered the war they used Cuban forces and strategy to win the Santiago campaign. and that the Spanish defeat did not bring Cuban freedom but simply turned the struggle into a new phase with the United States as the opponent (Corbitt. 1963). Cuban revisionists adopted the name Guerra Hispana Cuban- anericana as the name for the war. They condemned Root. McKinley. Wood. arnd Roosevelt as imperialists seeking to annex the island and praised Geaneral John R. Brooke for his efforts on behalf of Cuban independence antd Senator Teller for insisting that the United States announce to the world that it did not intend to annex Cuba (Corbitt. 1966). 85 Revisionists from other Caribbean territories have posed a similar challenge to the dominant orthodox position. For example. Lopez and Petras (1974) from Pnerto Rico argued that the United States invasion of Puerto Rico was a deliberate. well-planned act. whose genesis anteceded the official declaration of war against Spain in 1898. They explained that a number of strategic considerations such as the need for coaling stations and naval bases influenced the growing United States interest in Puerto Rico. but the dominant motivating force was economic. The United States had become an "expansionist capitalist country" and was in need of markets and raw materials. Puerto Rico was seen as an important potential market and a supplier of sugar to the United States. Denis (1972). too. rejected the traditional Puerto Rican writers who. in his words. "portrayed the United States at the time of the Spanish-American War as a forgetful kindly giant who by a trick of fate found itself unexpectedly with an empire on its hands" (pp. 65- 66). On the contrary. Denis felt that "the expansion of the United States must be seen in its proper perspective as a movement destined to gain commercial. industrial and financial hegemony in the Western Hemisphere. and as a necessary corollary to that. naval and military bases indispensable to maintaining this hegemony" (p. 67). Williams (1966). the Trinidadian historian. saw Theodore Roosevelt as the American counterpart of Bismarck. Chamberlain. Rhodes. and Ferry and suggested that only the long European rivalry over the future of Cuba throughout the nineteenth century prevented him from 86 annexing Cuba. Instead. he contented himself with a call for the independence of Cuba. Williams went on to hint darkly that."all American politicians and businessmen know the type of independence he had in mind" (p. 159). Wm W The various interpretations of this theme relate closely to interpretations of the Spanish-American War. which were examined previously. With respect to the present theme. the controversy appears to revolve around four main questions: Why did the United States intervene in the Caribbean-- security? humanitarian mission? economic profit? Who were the initiators of the policy of intervention? What was the nature of the interventions? What were the effects of the interventions? As in the case of the key questions on the Spanish-American War. his- torians have differed in their answers to these questions. disagreeing mainly on whether economic or political factors were the most impor- tant. The first of these questions has stimulated rather fierce controversy. Bemis (1943). the grandfather of United States diplomatic history and a consensus historian. suggested a number of motives that in his view guided the policy of intervention. Among them were the desire to "safeguard the strategic interests of the United States" (p. 164) and to "secure the approaches to the Isthmus against a lodge- ment of non—American power" Q» 143). "to support the Roosevelt 87 Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine" and "to help the people themselves willy-nilly. by stabilizing their governments and economies" (p. 161). According to Bemis. if the United States was to be charged with impe- rialism. it was "an imperialism against imperialism." designed to "protect first the security of the Continental Republic. next the security of the entire world. against intervention by the imperialistic powers of the Old World" (pp. 385-86). Munrti(1964). one of the foremost consensus authorities on this subject and a former state department official with responsibility for the area. dismissed the notion of United States imperialism as a "myth" (p. 348). He insisted that the establishment of customs receiverships in places like the Dominican Republic at the time was intended to "promote peace and better government." and that Americans had “little thought of establishing any permanent political control" (1959. p. 233k. The Platt Amendment. the Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine and the military occupation of Haiti and the Dominican Republic. was carried out with the intention of ending conditions that posed a threat to United States security. For Munro. United States policy toward the Caribbean was "purely political" (p. 531). Perkins (1947). another consensus historian. stressed the selflessness and benevolence of the United States. He felt that it was the construction of the Panama Canal that had the greatest effect on United States policy at this time. In his view. "the increasing sensitivity of the American government with regard to the situation in the Caribbean and the increasing stress it laid on noninterference by 88 European powers in the area" were related to the problem of the security of the waterway. With regard to the second question. Perkins felt that the initiative for United States policy in the Caribbean at this time came from "government officials" who were concerned mainly with strategic and political issues and that it was the United States government that was primarily interested "in the process of converting the Caribbean into an American lake" (p. 134). In discussing the nature of United States interventions. consensus historians have seemed to regard the interventions as the means to an end rather than as an end in itself: the end being to discourage revolutions. to reform the "bad financial practices that weakened the governments." to foster economic and political stability. and to "improve the general economic and social conditions in the Caribbean" (Munro. 1978. pp. 348-49). This should be seen as helping. not exploiting. its neighbors. Consensus historians have seldom challenged or tested United States policy assumptions. The United States intervention in Panama in 1903 has generally been regarded in consensus scholarship as the only flaw in United States Caribbean policy (Bemis. 1943). The feeling seems to have been. however. that this should be overlooked since it resulted in the construction of the canal and its opening to "traffic for the commerce of the whole world" in 1914 (Perkins. 1947. p. 124). The suggestion was that the end justified the means. 89 While the Caribbean states have been presented generally as passive objects of United States foreign policy and have received consistently negative treatment. consensus scholarship has stressed the positive effects of United States interventions on the Caribbean. Bemis (1943). for example. writing about the occupation of the Dominican Republic in 1916. stated that The long occupation. the educational and economic improvement flow- ing from it without any exploitation of the island by the United States and its nationals. has had a certain proven therapeutic effect on political stability. In recent years. after this timely tutelage. the Dominican Republic has been running on its own very successfully. (p. 191) Other positive effects of the intervention on the people of Nicaragua. the Dominican Republic. and Haiti have been emphasized: the building of roads. the improvements in the sanitary conditions. and the promulga- tion of new constitutions (Munro. 1978). Consensus historians have perceived the Caribbean as a "sphere of influence" of the United States. and the people of the Caribbean as "chronic wrong-doers" given to bribery and corruption. whose behavior has forced the United States to deviate from time to time»from its traditional anti-imperialist and noninterventionist policy in order to put things right. For these writers. intervention means military intervention. which lasts only as long as it takes to solve the particular problems. Much of this interpretation has been rejected by the revi- sionists. They have accused the consensus writers of casuistry and hypocrisy (Williams. 1962). Intervention has been redefined to include economic. social. and cultural penetration. and United States-Caribbean 90 relations have been reanalyzed within the framewomk of dependency theory and hegemonial relations (see Perez. 1982. pp. 170-80). Revisionist writers have been united in the emphasis they have placed on economic factors in their analysis of United States motiva- tion. Gardner (1978). for example. suggested that United States motives lay in the need to find outlets for surplus capital and foreign markets for manufactured goods. Green (1971) charged. too. that "every President from Roosevelt to Coolidge encouraged an influx of private capital into Latin American railroads and agriculture" (pp. 4-7). Nearing and Freeman (1925) explained that "economic activities are reflected sooner or later in the realm of politics" and that sooner or later "foreign investments will modify foreign policy" q» 17). This was supported in Gardner (1978) where he concluded that "banker involvement in American foreign policy was greater in theTCaribbean and Central America" UL 337). Nearing and Freeman also claimed that the United States government had often acted as solicitor for American investors abroad as naval intelligence missions. in addition to report- ing on naval matters. also reported on opportunities for investment. Underlying all this. according to Kolko (1976). was the desire to achieve hegemony--to establish an exclusive sphere of influence in Latin America and the Caribbean. Alongside a vastly different view of United States interven- tion. revisionists also have held different perspectives on the nature of United States interventions. They have felt that United States domination of the region followed naturally from United States 91 investment in the region. The terms "hegemony." "colonialism." and "exploitation" feature prominently in the literature. Panama has been regarded as "a virtual colony of the United States" (La Feber. 1963). while the hegemonial system developed by the United States has been said to have permitted Cuba "a purely rhetorical independence" (Kolko. 1976. p. 46) since it had used its troops. ships. and economic weapons "to enforce limits on Cuba's economic. political and social affai rs" (Williams. 1962. p. 2). We read further that. in Panama. the United States supervised elections. controlled the foreign policy. and domi- nated the economy of that country. 'The defense of the Canal became just one of many factors influencing United States policy. not a "pri- mary or sole reason" (La Feber. 1963. p. 70). Revisionist literature has centered on the effects of American intervention on the Caribbean. and the negative social. economic. and political effects have been emphasized--the stagnation of agriculture. the chronic unemployment and underemployment. absentee’monopoly land- ownership. decapitalization. overdependence on one or two export crops. and the decay of peasant farming (Morley. 1974). The responses of the Caribbean peoples to the United States presence have also received some attention. Caribbean revisionist scholars have been highly critical of United States policy toward the Caribbean in the early decades of the present century. One wrote of Roosevelt: "What could not be achieved by dollars. was achieved by the bullets of the marines. What he or 92 America wanted he just took as he took the Panama Canal" (Williams. 1966. p. 161). Another claimed with respect to Haiti that The North Americans created their loyal. local police force and recruited their political lackeys. but they made no serious attempt to strengthen the social and political institutions. . . . Moreover. they accentuated racial prejudice. segregation and prostitution. (Knight. 1978. p. 183) The same writer dismissed the'construction of infrastructure that followed United States occupations in this period. He commented that "behind the marines went the usual brigade of capitalists dispensing North American techniques in just about everything from agriculture to morality" (p. 185). Caribbean revisionists have highlighted the negative effects of United States intervention on the Caribbean during this period. For example. Silen (1971) wrote that in Puerto Rico "agriculture was sacrificed to obtain rapid economic growth rates in a few years." with the result that the rural population was forced to migrate to the towns where they "were driven into economic dependence merely to survive" (p. 87). This was supported in Denis (1972). who claimed that as a result of United States policy Puerto Rico became "a typical colonial economy that consumes what it does not produce and produces what it does not consume" (p. 76). Denis was at pains to describe United States colonial ism with respect to Puerto Rico. He suggested that all of the elements indicating the exploitation of a colony occurred here.... : the captive market: an increase in the value of goods due to an abundant work force and the payment of subsist- ence level salaries; the exploitation of native natural resources by a handful of foreign investors; the predominance of finance capital from the colonial power: latifundism and monoculture; the 93 military occupation of the territory; the superimposition of an administrative structure responsible only to the colonial power. (p. 72) MW As was the case with the two themes previously discussed. it was possible to identify a number of issues related to the Good Neighbor Policy that have aroused controversy among historians. On these issues also. the interpretations of consensus and revisionist historians have differed. First. there are divergent interpretations as to the origins of the Good Neighbor Policy. According to the consensus school. the policy was in keeping with the traditional United States policy of anti-imperialism and arose from a post-Versailles feeling of security that made military intervention seem unnecessary (see Bemis. 1943. p. 389). The United States wished to help her neighbors. Bemis further explained that this inherent altruism was best illustrated by the "incredible self-denial" of the abrogation of the Platt Amendment (p. 232). Revisionist historians have traced the origins of the policy to other factors. They have claimed that the creation of local armed forces by the United States and the emergence of pro-American dictator- ships in the Caribbean republics made armed intervention unnecessary (Perez. 1982). For revisionist authors. the abrogation of the Platt Amendment was "an inexpensive gesture to Cuban nationalism" (Smith. 1960. p. 157). 94 While consensus writers have regarded the purpose of the Good Neighbor policy as being primarily social and political. the promotion of United States security interests (Wood. 1961). and the advancement of civilization (Bemis. 1943). the revisionists have seemed to share the opinion that the policy was largely economic and to a lesser extent political in its intentions--to promote stability in order to bring American capital into the region. to solve domestic economic problems. to secure client states. and to promote United States political hegemony in the region (see Perez. 1982. p. 168). For consensus historians. the main function of the Good Neigh- bor Policy seems to have been to increase the economic and social well- being of the nations of the New World (Bemis. 1943). Revisionists have called attention to other aspects of the policy--the reciprocal trade agreements. the support for authoritarian regimes sympathetic to the United States. the replacement of military intervention by political intervention. for example. through the use of diplomatic recognition. the interference with electoral systems. and the giving and withholding of support (La Feber. 1978). Consequently. while consensus historians have identified effects favorable to both the United States and the Caribbean. the revisionists have seemed to suggest that only the United States benefited as the leadership of many Caribbean states became extensions of United States power and the creation of stability facili- tated economic penetration (Perez. 1982). From a Caribbean revisionist perspective. the Good Neighbor Policy arose from the desire of Roosevelt to "still the insistent 95 criticism of Yankee Imperialism and remove the persistent apprehension of dollar diplomacy" (Williams. 1966. p. 1920. Another Caribbean revisionist historian argued that the policy was "enunciated to put a soft glove on the heavy-handed efforts of the early decades" (Knight. 1978. p. 180) and was really designed not to foster political inde- pendence but to control it. W125 WW5 In Chapter III a number of high school history textbooks were examined for the purpose of identifying trends of a quantitative nature. These same textbooks will now be analyzed to determine whether or not. or the extent to which. the textbooks differ in their interpre- tation of the three themes selected for analysis. whether or not there have been changes in interpretation over time. and the extent to which these changes correspond to the main historiographical trends that have been identified and discussed. With respect to each textbook. one edition in each of the three periods 1950-59. 1960-69. and 1970-79 will be examined. They are identified by author(sL. W W High school students who used Canfield and Wilder's Making W in the 19505 would have learned that the United States went to war against Spain at the end of the nineteenth century for economic reasons--new markets for export. new sources of raw material. and new opportunities for investment seemed necessary. There was also 96 the need to protect United States trade with Cuba. This view is sup- ported by statistics. We read that by the end of the century "Ameri— cans had invested about fifty million dollars in Cuban sugar planta- tions. tobacco fields and mines" and that "our annual trade with the island exceeded 100 million dollars)‘ This edition ascribed the responsibility for the United States involvement in the war mainly to public opinion aroused by the "yellow press." the de L6me letter. and the sinking of the Maine. "Pressure of public opinion forced the governmentfls hand. President McKinley. his cabinet and most of the nation's business interests sincerely hoped to maintain peaceful relations with SpainJ' The revised editions of the late 19605 and 19705 (Wade. Wilder. 8. Wade) were somewhat similar in their treatment of the theme. These editions. too. explained the economic motives that led the United States to become involved in the war with Spain. but. unlike the 1952 edition. these later editions examined factors other than the economic as well. Two of these were Manifest Destiny and Social Darwinism. The new expansionism was described as "a natural continuation of the drive to achieve 'manifest destiny' half a century before." and the belief in the superiority of the white race and its responsibility to spread its culture to less "civilized" peoples also played a part. A new political factor was introduced in the 1966 edition and carried in the 1972 edition. This was that President McKinley wanted war because he "feared that a peaceful solution would divide the Repub- licans. bring losses to them in the congressional elections that year. 97 and give the Democrats a campaign issue in 19003' Consequently. unlike the 1952 edition. these editions ascribed the responsibility for the war to the President. who was said to have delivered a war message to Congress two days after Spain had met the American demands to arrange an armistice and disband the concentration camps. Other parties also said to favor United States involvement in the war were the expansion- ists. who "favored immediate action by United States in CubaJ' These editions also claimed that business leaders were against the war because they feared its possible effects on trade. Whereas the 1952 edition took the consensus position that the President was pressured into war by public opinion. the two later editions explained that the war was the result of the Presidentfis rational decision. On the question of motives. all editions. like the revisionists. emphasized economic motives. though surprisingly. the two later editions introduced Manifest Destiny and Social Darwinism. motives usually claimed by the consensus school. The treatment in each edition was. therefore. neither purely consensus nor purely revisionist and is perhaps more appropriately described as eclectic. Wm; There were no changes in interpretation in the three editions of the Graff and Krout examined. ‘This textbook seemed to take the position that the expansionists Fiske. Burgess. Lodge. Mahan. and Roosevelt were mainly responsible for the war. They put pressure on a reluctant President. 98 In all editions. under the subheading "The Voices of Expansionfl'a number of voices associated with a variety of motives were identified and described. These voices included the Social Darwinists. who felt that English-speaking peoples were superior and were destined and duty bound to spread their superior culture to "every land on the earth's surface that is not already the seat of an old civilization." A number of powerful men were identified as advocating expansionism. These men felt that the United States should follow the example of Western European nations and acquire colonies. The Graff and Krout textbooks suggested that a generation of Americans had not seen war. were unaware of its horrors. and that many became Jingoists as a reaction to boredom. .Some expansionists focused on United States investment in Cuba. while humanitarians were aroused by Weylerus reconcentrationfl The role of the United States press in exploiting situations such as the plight of Evangeline Eisneros. the de Lame letter. and the Maine incident were discussed. The texts strongly disclaimed any notion that businessmen supported these activities. They were said to have been "very eager to avoid war." The Graff and Krout texts fell mainly in the consensus tradi- tion in their interpretation. and that interpretation had not changed up to the 1973 edition. ‘The only revisionist input seemed to lie in 1In an effort to suppress the revolution. General Weyler. the leader of the Spaniards. ordered all people living in territory con- trolled by the revolutionists into concentration camps where thousands died of disease and privation. 99 the recognition of the existence of United States investment in and trade with Cuba. W The interpretation in Bragdon and McCutchen's l954 and 196l editions was similar to that in Graff and Krout. According to the 1954 edition. the United States was not governed by economic motives in the same ways as Europeans because there was in the United States "an abundance of raw materials. an immense home market. and little surplus capital available for foreign investment." Consequently. "when the American people finally acquired an overseas empire. they did so with- out knowing in advance what was coming." This idea was repeated in the l96l edition. In both the l954 and the l96l editions. it was public opinion spurred on by the "yellow press" that was most responsible for the war. Big business was said to be "reluctant to go to war." as were American property holders in Cuba. Merican public opinion. however. favored war because the American people were "overwhelmingly on the side of the right of the islanders to independence." These two edi- tions seemed. therefore. to be fully in the consensus tradition. Although the 1973 edition also contained the idea that the United States had ventured into imperial ism "almost by chance." a number of "voices" that had been raised in favor of expansion were identified. They included Mahan. with his dream of a great fleet and coaling stations in the Pacific and the Caribbean; Strong. the propo- nent of Social Darwinism; as well as Lodge and Roosevelt. who were said to have shared Strong's "pseudo-Darwinian notions." In this edition. 100 the business community was said to be generally "opposed to foreign adventure" but "some American corporations were actively seeking for- eign markets." and during the war itself some businessmen became "con- verted to imperial ism." This edition retained the notion that American business was reluctant to go to war. but the statement that American property owners in Cuba were also reluctant was dropped. and in its place the statement that "war rumors depressed the stock market" was inserted. Whereas earlier editions were fairly moderate in their descriptions of popular opinion. the l973 edition described it as a "torrential wave." It seems that the l973 edition was still basically in the consensus mode. though here and there. traces of revisionism can be found. For example. whereas in the 1954 edition the chapter heading was "Emerging from Isolation." in the l973 edition the heading was "Imperialism." maximum Three editions of Todd and Curti were examined. the 1950. the 1966. and the 1977 editions. Looking at the headings under which the Spanish-American War was discussed. it was possible to conclude that. if anything. the various editions of this textbook became increasingly traditional. Whereas the chapter heading under which the war fell in the 1950 and 1966 editions was "The Spanish-American War makes the United States a colonial power." in the 1977 edition the term "colonial power" was avoided. The new heading was "Deepening American involve- ment overseas after the war with Spain." There was no major revision "m cc “U in al CT th '& a" (h (3. 101 of this section of the text. 'The l977 edition dropped a few terms and phrases or added new phrases here and there. but there was no real change in interpretation. In all three editions we read that the United States entered the war with the argument that it was fighting merely to free the oppressed Cubans. It ended the war with "an empire on its hands." In the first two editions we read that American business was "mildly interested in having the United States enter the race for colonies." This changed in the l977 edition to "by l890 a growing number of American business groups as well as the nation's agricultural interests were pleased to have the United States pursue an active race for overseas economic opportunities. if not for actual coloniesJ' 1h all editions Strong and Mahan were described as expansionists and credited with influence on United States thought in this respect. All editions described how gradually the United States became involved in the war--the growing sympathy for the rebels. encouraged by Cuban exiles in the United States and the "yellow press." the fact that Americans had investments in Cuba to the value of 50 million dollars. that trade between Cuba and the United States was being crippled by the war. All editions described the public clamor for war. which eventu- ally "proved too much for the President to resistJ' The preceding analysis seemed to suggest that in all three editions the interpretation was mostly in the consensus mode. 102 W W All high school history textbooks used in the Commonwealth Caribbean devoted at least one chapter to the theme "the United States in the Caribbean." We have seen (Chapter III) that the emphasis on this theme was greater in these textbooks than was the case with United States high school history textbooks. W Two editions of this textbook were examined. the l956 edition and the 1971 edition. There was no change in the text between the 1956 and the more recent l9‘Il edition. The role of Jose Marti in rallying American support for the Cuban cause was described. President McKinley was said to have "allowed himself to be pushed into the war" by public opinion. which had "vociferated" against Weyler's camps and was aroused by the sinking of the Maine. The damage being done to American property was mentioned as one factor to be considered. This text was strongly in the consensus mode. with just one element of revisionism. W This is one of the older textbooks currently in use. It has never been revised. though it has been reprinted several times. The coverage on the Spanish-American War included only the factors that led the United States to enter the war. The first factor discussed was the threat that the "Cuban-Spanish War posed to American lives and prop- erty." There were. it stated. "350.000.000 of American capital invested in Cuba and trade with America amounted to $l00.000.000 a 103 year." The role of the American newspapers in arousing public opinion and the effects of Spanish "outrages" and the destruction of the Maine were discussed. As far as it goes. the treatment of the theme can. therefore. be said to be eclectic since it combined both consensus and revisionist positions. 51:91: This textbook seemed to have an un-American perspective. The chapter in which the Spanish-American War was discussed was entitled "Ferment in the Spanish North." The war was referred to as "The War of Independence." The perspective seemed to be more Spanish than either American or. indeed. Caribbean. For example. we are told that it was unfortunate that Spain's political blunders drove many conservative Cubans into the hands of the rebels. Much emphasis was laid on the "Cuban propagandist bureau in the United States" in arousing sympathy and support for their cause. The text claimed that these Cuban patriots were only interested in getting American arms and ammunition to wage war. They did not want direct intervention by the United States. but the destruction of the Maine threw the United States "into the arms of Spain's opponents." We are told that a "hesitant President" was persuaded by "sympathy for the rebels and concern for America's interest" to declare war on Spain. America's interest had been described in the chapter in largely economic terms. The treatment of the thene in this text can. therefore. be said to be eclectic. n te an 104 .Munnax In this text the American role in the war was downplayed. The chapter heading. "Spain sees the last of her New World colonies." seemed to set the tone and suggested that the perspective was different from that of the United States history textbooks. The name Spanish- American War was not used; the emphasis was on the Cubans and their fortunes. We are simply told that America declared war on Spain fol- lowing the destruction of the Maine and that feelings in America had been aroused by an "immoderate press." Although the general approach to the tapic was not traditional. the actual treatment of the reasons why and how the United States became involved seemed to be in the consensus mode. Sunblock In this text the war was described as therCuban-American war against Spain or the Cuban-Spanish-American War--a Caribbean revision- ist title. The war itself was not discussed. WW mm: The treatment of the above theme by the selected history textbooks was then analyzed using the same system developed for the analysis of the first theme. WM W519 We have seen that the treatment of the Spanish-American War in this textbook contained both traditional and revisionist 105 interpretations. This trend continued in its treatment of Intervention and Dollar Diplomacy. For example. in discussing the United States motives for intervention. Canfield and Wilder said that the United States wanted to protect the Panama Canal and keep the peace. These are consensus positions. Canfield and Wilder. however. introduced revisionist thinking when it also included as a United States motive the desire to protect United States investments. This text. in discussing the nature of the intervention. avoided the consensus view that assistance. not exploitation. best described the nature of United States involvement in the Caribbean at that time. On the contrary. we read that "Dollar diplomacy 'meant' the use of American diplomatic influence to promote our financial and commercial interests abroad." In this text government officials. particularly the President of the United States. were presented as the initiators of this policy. There was no suggestion of their being even influenced by business interests. although economic and commercial motives were ascribed to them. This interpretation was in the consensus mode. Canfield and Wilder was eclectic in its treatment of the effects of the policy on the Caribbean. The authors suggested that the American occupation had its good and bad features. As in consensus histories. improvements such as the construction of railroads and bridges and freedom from wars. revolutions. and financial chaos were put forward as positive effects of United States intervention. But Canfield and Wilder also included negative effects. For example. they say that Americans were accused of cruelty to Haitians and that the 106 United States aroused the "hostility and suspicion" of Latin America by its control of the civil and economic affairs of Caribbean countries and by the use of force. We read also that during the occupation of the Dominican Republic. the Dominicans were deprived of their freedom. the press was censored. and there were complaints of unreasonable imprisonment and cruel punishments. Although the 1966 edition of this text by Wade. Wilder. and Wade was extensively revised and used different wording. the interpretation remained substantially the same. The United States government intervened in the Caribbean to safeguard the Canal and United States investments and to keep order in the Caribbean. This intervention had good and bad effects. which were described. There were no significant changes in the 1972 edition. .Gna££_and_KLQut This text dealt with intervention and dollar diplomacy under the heading "Uncle Sam makes himself policeman of the Americas." This suggested that a largely traditional treatment would follow. In all three editions examined. the following motives for the United States policy of intervention were given: 'to keep out foreign governments. to restore and maintain order and peace. to strengthen national security. and to protect the Canal. Referring specifically to dollar diplomacy. the earliest edition examined suggested that its purpose was "to create favorable conditions for investments by United States businessmen in foreign countries." and that this took the form of loans. Loans were St. to Sta Cor: int the 1 n1' men' Fest Vent 107 made to Nicaragua. for example. to help that country "to straighten out its financial difficulties." Apart from reducing the size of the print of the section heading. there was only one significant revision of this portion of the text in the l968 and 1973 editions. A New_XQLk_fleLa1d cartoon of Roosevelt with shoes off tramping across the Caribbean wielding a big club in his hand was replaced by a map of Middle America showing the United States and its possessions. It is to be noted that in the comment accompanying the map. it was suggested that. after l898. the United States interest in the region became political and strategic as well as commercial. W In this text. the interpretation was the same in the 1954 and 196l editions. According to these editions. the motives behind United States-Caribbean policy at this time were the desire to preserve order. to set up stable governments. and to protect the interests of United States investors and businessmen. This interpretation seemed to combine both traditional and revisionist elements. However. in their interpretation of the other issues. these editions remained firmly in the consensus mode. They used the United States government as the initiator of the policy. and only "good" effects of the policy were mentioned. Better electoral systems were set up. and order was restored and established. The 1973 edition made more concessions to the revisionists. It went further than the earlier editions in describing the economic 108 motives for the policy. Whereas in the earlier editions the motive was to "protect" the interests of the United States investors. in the 1973 edition it was to "promote United States business interests abroadJ’ In this edition. too. there was a comment on the nature of the policy. which was described as "economic imperialisnu" The edition was. therefore. more eclectic in its treatment of the topic. .Indd_and_QuL11 There were no major changes in interpretation in the three editions of this text that were examined. Very little new material was added to each new edition. and the most significant difference in coverage was that the 1977 edition was less expansive than the two earlier editions. and many explanations and elaborations were dropped. The topic was dealt with under the heading "The United States modifies and strengthens the Monroe Doctrine" in the first two edi- tions. whereas in the third the heading was "Intervention in Latin America under a modified Monroe DoctrineJ' In all editions a variety of reasons were given for the United States policy of intervention--to maintain law and order. to protect the lives and property of United States citizens living in other countries. to prevent EurOpean countries from intervening in the Western Hemisphere. to protect its weaker neighbors. These were all within the consensus mode. and referring specifically to dollar diplomacy we were told that that policy was designed to protect United 109 States investments. Self-defense and self-interest were the dominant motives. The United States government was said to be the initiator of the policy. which was described as protective or supervisory. In describ- ing results. emphasis was on the positive effects. The pol icy was said to benefit "all of the American countries." Referring to the Domini- can Republic. the texts told that "customs duties doubled under Ameri- can supervision and the financial position improved." We are also told of the benefits of United States occupation of Haiti--the improvement in health. sanitation. and education. Mention was made of the resent- ment the pol icy aroused in Latin America. All editions of this text were heavily in the consensus mode in their interpretation of this topic. MWWD Wheels: W The treatment of this topic. too. was identical in the two editions. A number of reasons were given for United States interven- tion in the Caribbean--the defense of the Canal. protection of American property. With respect to the Cuban intervention of l906-09. the conclusion was that intervention was the only "alternative to anarchy." while the interventions in Haiti and the Dominican Republic were "not made at the behest of American investors." The motives were princi- pally political and strategic. The interventions were "not made at the 110 behest of American investors. but by the United States government acting on its own initiative." The occupations were said to have brought."great advantages" to Haiti and the Dominican Republic. Among the advantages listed were the maintenance of order. the reorganization of finances. the construction of roads. the organization of health services. water supply and sewage disposal. and the provision of schools. Also included as an advantage was the training and arming of a local police force. At the same time. negative effects of the Cuban occupation were discussed--the increased dependence of the economy on sugar and on the United States market and the destruction of the peasantry. W The treatment of the topic in this text was less traditional than was the case with the Parry and Sherlock. A revisionist response was given to the question of United States motives. It was stated unequivocally that the United States government intervened to protect American investors and that interventions occurred only in "those places where United States businesses were already established)‘ Benefits to the occupied territories were listed. such as greater job security and improvements in sanitation and transportation. This text also mentioned the reintroduction of the corve'I in Haiti and the hatred which that aroused. w~—— —._ ...—u——_ 1A system of forced labor originally introduced by the French. 111 This textbook was perhaps the most traditional of them all in its treatment of this topic. The United States government was seen as the sole initiator of the policy of intervention. which was to be regarded as a policy of assistance. not exploitation. carried out for the protection of life and property. The benefits of the occupations were discussed--the building of railways and the raising of living standards of the peasantry. Garcia. however. pointed out some negative effects such as the growth of monoculture. absenteeism. economic dependence. and more corrupt and dictatorial governments. Mum This text dealt only with the intervention in the Dominican Republic. According to this text. the reason for the intervention was that the United States government was wary and suspicious of French and German interests in that country. Apparently. however. the interven- tion did not result in good government. and the corruption of Trujillo was described. Sherlock According to this text. the United States! motives for interven- tion were strategic and political--fear of intervention by European powers. the need to restore order in the republic. and the defense of the Canal. 112 Both negative and positive effects of the United States occupa- tions were discussed. The usual public works were listed. but we were also told of the negative economic effects. W W W We The first edition examined devoted only eight lines to the~Good Neighbor Policy. in which we were told when the policy developed and that. in keeping with the policy. the United States "gradually sur- rendered its control over the Caribbean areas)‘ The second and third editions paid much more attention to the policy than did the first. In these editions. the claim was made that the policy arose from President Hoover's attempt to win the good will of Latin America because at the time of his inauguration. United States relations with the countries of Latin America were strained by years of "big stick" and "dollar diplomacy." As the world situation grew more threatening. it became necessary to plan for the collective security of the hemisphere. Various applications of the policy were mentioned--the abrogation of therPlatt Amendment. the formulation of new trade agree- ments. According to this text. billions of dollars were given by the United States to governments in Latin America for projects such as the construction of roads and bridges designed to raise the standard of living of the people of the region. All editions of this text. therefore. seemed to follow the consensus tradition in dealing with this topic in United States-Caribbean history. 113 mm: The l959 edition of this text described in some detail the origins of the development of the Good Neighbor Policy. According to this text. after the First World War. relations between the United States and a number of Latin American nations were "strained" due to the various applications of the Roosevelt Corollary before the First World War. The United States now made several "conciliatory steps." which were described in some detail--the withdrawal from Nicaragua. the treaty with Columbia. the withdrawal from the Dominican Republic. the Cl ark Memorandum. These steps were said to have paved the way for the new policy. The formal statement of the policy was then given. This was followed by descriptions of actions that "showed our sincerity." The United States was said to have refrained from sending troops to Cuba in l934 "despite grave provocation" and "to have gone so far as to abrogate the Platt Amendment." As a result of this policy. the United States gained both social and economic benefits. W This text placed rather more emphasis on the Good Neighbor Policy than the Canfield and Wilder. In the l954 and l96l editions. the heading of the chapter in which it was discussed appeared as "The Good Neighbor and the Rise of the DictatorsJ‘ This became»"The Good Neighbor and the Axis threat" in the l973 edition. In all three editions. the following quotation from Franklin Roosevelt was cited: 'Because the people of this nation have come to a 114 realization that time and distance no longer exist in the older sense. they understand that what harms one segment of humanity harms the rest)‘ This served as the rationale for the policy. the main purpose of which was said to be the desire on the part of the United States to make friends with her southern neighbors and to "correct wrong impres- sions" that Latin Americans had of the United States. Mention was made of the applications of this policy in the Caribbean--the abrogation of the Platt Amendment. the withdrawal of the Marines from Haiti. and the abandonment by the United States of the right to oversee the government of Panama. The l973 edition added. "the abandonment of control of the H finances of the Dominican Republic)‘ All editions described the varh— ' ous attempts by the United States to strengthen cultural ties between the two cultures and to organize the Western Hemisphere against the Axis powers. The Monroe Doctrine was said to have become multilateral rather than unilateral. All three editions emphasized the benefits of the Good Neighbor Policy to the United States. They claimed that the policy "created new friendliness and respect for the United States in the countries south of the border" and "paid dividends when the United States attempted to organize the Americas against the threat of German and Italian aggression." Whereas the earlier editions concluded that the Good Neighbor Policy had "greatly reduced distrust of the 'colossus of the North.'" the 1973 edition was more cautious and warned that there was two machinery to enforce Pan American c00peration. the United States was sstill free to act as it pleased in defense of its own self-interest. 115 and that it was still a "colossus" although a more friendly one than formerly. This text. too. seemed to be quite squarely within the consensus mode in describing and discussing the Good Neighbor Policy. W This text stated frankly that "sel f-interest as well as genuine desire for friendship and understanding motivated the Good Neighbor m—u. Pol icy." The United States needed to trade with South America. and the rise of the Axis powers made it expedient that the United States seek to improve relations with Latin America. Roosevelt's comment. that the "national defense has now become a problem of continental defense." was cited to explain United States policy of hemispheric defense. The background given to this change of policy was the anti-American feeling in Latin America and the growing feeling in the United States that friendship between the peoples of the two continents was desirable. The text explained and illustrated the Good Neighbor Policy by referring to the withdrawal from Haiti. the handing over of the customs houses of the Dominican Republic. the abrogation of the Platt Amend- ment. and the l936 treaty with Panama. The attempts to improve political. economic. and cultural relations among the nations of the New World were mentioned. with some emphasis being placed on trade agreements. In this text. too. we were told that the Declaration of 116 Lima1 made the Monroe Doctrine a multilateral policy. The texts identified the improved relations between Latin America and the United States as the main results of the policy. It seems fair to conclude. therefore. that there was no sig- nificant change in any of the four texts over three decades in the way they treated the Good Neighbor Policy. All four texts were decidedly traditional in their treatment of the topic. IWWWLQMD 111W It has been noted that high school history textbooks used in the Commonwealth Caribbean do not devote much attention to the Good Neighbor Policy. In fact. three textbooks. the Murray. the Garcia. and the Sherlock. did not discuss it at all. although aspects of the policy such as the abrogation of the Platt Amendment were mentioned. W According to this text. the Good Neighbor Policy came about because "the strategic necessity" for a policy of intervention was past and that policy had been unpopular not only in the occupied countries. but also in the United States. The United States. therefore. withdrew its occupying forces from the Dominican Republic. and the Roosevelt Corollary was disavowed. We were told that United States troops were not withdrawn from Haiti until "after the Havana Conference of 1929 1A collective security pact adopted by the eighth Pan American Conference held at Lima. Peru. in TQBS. By this pact all American nations agreed to defend themselves and one another against any threat to their peace. institutions. or territorial integrity. 117 had revealed the almost universal unpopularity of the United StatesJ' By inference. the United States now wished to win friends in the region. The effects of the policy were not discussed. Wampum This text discussed the Good Neighbor Policy within the context of Roosevelt's New Deal policy. The withdrawal from Haiti and the relinquishing of the "rights" of the Platt Amendment in l934 were mentioned. It was stated that the agreements between the United States and Latin America for collective protection in the event of hostilities in the Second World War came about as a direct result of this change in policy. The text also mentioned aid given by the United States to its Caribbean colonies. W W W To add a further and perhaps more objective dimension to the analysis. and for greater ease of comparison. it was decided to iden- tify once again the main research questions arising from the three themes and the main consensus and revisionist answers with respect to each of them. For the Spanish-American War three main questions were selected. for United States Intervention and Dollar Diplomacy four questions. and for the Good Neighbor Policy four questions. In all. ll questions were identified. 'Table 20 was prepared. indicating the main consensus and revisionist answers with respect to those questions. 1113 Table 20.--Consensus and revisionist perspectives on selected themes from United States- Caribbean relations. Theme Issue ConsensusPerspective Revisionist PerSpective l. The Spanish- l. Who was responsible Public opinion Business and commercial American War for the U.S. involvement in the war? interests . How did this involvement come about? It was an accident/ unplanned it was planned . Why did the U.S. become involved? For social/political motives For economic motives 2. United States i. intervention and dollar Why did the U.S. intervene? For stratetic, political motives For economic motives diplomacy 2. What was the nature Assistance/Super- Exploitation of that interven- vision tion? 3. Who were the ini- Government officials United States business tiators of the interests policy? b. What were the Positive effects Negative effects effects of the intervention on the Caribbean? 3. The Good i. What were the Anti-imperialism/ Intervention was no Neighbor origins of the anti-United States longer necessary Policy policy? policy in Latin America and the Caribbean 2. What was the Make friends/promote Economic and political purpose of the policy? United States secu- rity interests hegemony . What were the main applications of the policy? Withdrawal of troops, e.g.. from Haiti; cultural, economic, and political pro- grams interference in Carib- bean affairs . What were the main effects of the poliCy? Positive for the U.S. and the Caribbean Negative for the Carib- bean 119 The items in the Consensus and Revisionist columns were used as indicators of the direction of content. Each consensus position on each of the ll questions was allocated 1 point. while each revisionist position on each of the same ll questions was allocated a score of -l. The textbooks were again analyzed. It was possible for a textbook to score a total of ll or of -ll. It was expected that each textbook would fall somewhere in between those two extremes. A continuum was therefore prepared as follows: -ll -10 -9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 l 2 3 4 5 5 6 7 8 9 10 ll Revisionist Consensus The view was that it was possible to picture each textbook analyzed as falling on the above continuum. which ranged from extreme revisionism to extreme orthodoxy. The treatment of the Spanish-American War in the textbooks was first subjected to this analysis. For the Spanish-American War. which had three main questions. it was possible to score between -3 and 3. For example. in the T954 and 1961 editions of the Bragdon and McCutchen. public opinion was given the main responsibility for the war. the war was said to be unplanned. and a number of social and political factors that were said to have influenced the United States were listed. These three positions earned a total score of 3. These two editions of the Bragdon and McCutchen adopted none of the revision- ist positions on this theme. Many textbooks. however. took their Re Dc Dl‘ to Ec' 120 interpretations from both sides. For example. the 1973 edition of the Bragdon and McCutchen. while maintaining the three positions listed above. also introduced the notion that some American corporations were seeking foreign markets. and this was allocated a score of -l. making a total score for this edition of 2. This bears out the conclusion arrived at from the qualitative analysis that the 1973 edition of this text was marginally less orthodox than the other two editions examined. The Todd and Curti took the same positions as the l973 edition of the Bragdon and McCutchen in all three editions and was also allo- cated a total score of 2. The scores on this theme for each of the textbooks examined are given in Table 21. All texts examined. therefore. fell to the right of the continuum. The range was between 0 and 3. the United States text- books being further right than the Caribbean textbooks. None of the textbooks could be said to be revisionist:I The treatment of the other two themes was similarly analyzed. Results are shown in Tables 22 and 23. With respect to the treatment of United States Intervention and Dollar Diplomacy (Table 22). the range seemed wider than for the theme Previously analyzed. The range was -l to 4 from a possible range of -4 t0 4. The Todd and Curti was the most orthodox. while the Augier. Gordon. Hall. and Reckord was the least orthodox. “ 1Textbooks with scores between -l and T can be described as 6C1 ectic in their treatment of the theme. Gr Br. Toc Par Gan Hun Shel 121 Table 2l.--Textbook treatment of the Spanish-American War. Textbook Edition 7 Score Canfield and Wilder/ 1952 0 Wade. Wilder. and Wade 1966 0 l972 O Graff and Krout l959 2 l968 2 l973 2 Bragdon and McCutchen 1954 3 ' 196l 3 1973 2 Todd and Curti T950 2 l966 2 1977 2 Parry and Sherlock l956 l l97l l Augi er. Gordon. Hall. and Reckord 1960 0 Garci a 1965 0 Murray 197l l Sherlock 1973 - L-L.. d—Jfl Pa 122 Table 22.--Textbook treatment of United States Intervention and Dollar Diplomacy. 1900-1921. Textbook Edition Score Canfield and Wilder/ l952 0 Wade. Wilder. and Wade 1966 0 l972 0 Graff and Krout 1959 2 l968 2 l973 2 Bragdon and McCutchen l954 2 1961 l l973 l Todd and Curti l950 4 1966 4 l977 4 Parry and Sherlock 1956 l l97l l Augier. Gordon. Hall. and Reckord 1960 -l Garcia 1965 2 Murray 1971 l Sherlock l973 2 Ge l‘u Sh Fan Thi EON tree (Tier 18 Table 23.-~Textbook treatment of the Good Neighbor Policy. Textbook Edition Score Canfield and Wilder/ 1952 4 Wade. Wilder. and Wade 1966 4 1972 4 Graff and Krout T959 4 1968 4 l973 4 Bragdon and McCutchen 1954 4 l96l 4 l973 4 Todd and Curti 1950 3 l966 3 1977 3 Parry and Sherlock l956 3 197l 3 Augier. Gordon. Hall. and Reckord 1961 2 Garcia 1965 - Murray l97l - Sherlock 1973 .. For the treatment of the Good Neighbor Pol icy. the possible range was also -4 to 4. The actual range for this theme was 2 to 4. This is smaller than the range for the two themes analyzed above. The texts fell heavily to the right of the continuum. Only the Augier. Gordon. Hall. and Reckord came near being considered eclectic in its treatment of the topic. As was the case with the other two themes. the American texts fell further to the right than did the Caribbean texts. I‘l .Ji l'r 124 All texts were more traditional in their treatment of this theme than of the other two. The scores on all three themes are combined in Table 24. Table 24.--Textbook treatnent of three selected thenes. Score Textbook Edition lst 2nd 3rd Total Theme Theme Theme Canfield 8 Wilder/ T952 0 O 4 4 Wade. Wilder 8. Wade T966 0 O 4 4 l972 O O 4 4 Graff 8 Krout T959 2 2 4 8 l968 2 2 4 8 l973 2 2 4 8 Bragdon 8. McCutchen T954 3 2 4 9 T961 3 l 4 8 T973 2 l 4 8 Todd 8. Curti l950 2 4 3 9 l966 2 4 3 9 1977 2 4 3 9 Parry 8. Sherlock 1956 l l 3 5 l97l l l 3 5 Augier. Gordon. Hall 8 Reckord T961 0 -l 2 l Garcia T965 0 2 - 2 Murray l971 l l - 2 Sherlock l973 - 2 - 2 ¥ The average score for each textbook was then computed (see Tabie 25). 125 Table 25.--Average scores of textbooks on a measure of direction. Textbook Score Canfield and Wilder/ Wade. Wilder. and Wade 4 Graff and Krout 8 Bragdon and McCutchen 8.3 Todd and Curti 9 Parry and Sherlock 5 Augier. Gordon. Hall and Reckord ‘| Garcia 2 Murray 2 Sherlock 2 On a continuum of -ll to ll. the Todd and Curti fell the furthest to the right. The Augier. Gordon. Hall. and Reckord was also on the right but was closest to the center. The average score of all United States textbooks examined was 7.3. while that of the Caribbean textbooks was 2.8. Both as a group and as individual textbooks. the United States textbooks were further to the right on the continuum than were the Caribbean textbooks. To discover whether there had been changes in the treatment of direction over time. the average scores for the textbooks published in each of the three decades were computed (see Table 26). Table 26 shows 126 that although there was a slight shift to the left over time. this shift was marginal and occurred between the T9505 and T9605. Table 26.--Average scores of textbooks on a measure of direction. by decade. Decade Score l950-59 7.0 1960-69 5.3 1970-79 5.4 .Conclusion This quantitative. objective analysis bore out the findings of the more subjective qualitative analysis carried out at the beginning of the chapter--that high school history textbooks are largely tradi- tional in their interpretations and that very few of the revisionist interpretations have been adopted by textbook authors/publishers. United States high school history textbooks are more traditional than their counterparts in the Commonwealth Caribbean. and there has been little change in interpretation over time. Summanx In this chapter the objective was to describe and analyze the historiographical interpretation of United States-Caribbean relations in United States and Caribbean history textbooks. It was assumed that 127 the direction of the content of historical writing may be determined by this process. The first step was to select three controversial topics in the history of United States-Caribbean relations during the period 1895 to T939. The treatment of these topics by research historians was ana- lyzed to determine the most comnmuiinterpretation of each of the three tepics which may be attributable to the consensus and revisionist modes. The treatment of the three topics in United States and Carib- bean textbooks was then examined to discover whether or not there had been changes in interpretation over time. to compare these changes to historiographical trends. and to compare the interpretative trends in the two sets of books. The hypothesis being tested in this chapter was that there have been changes in the direction of the content of history textbooks. directly reflective of historiographical trends. The finding of this investigation was that although. generally speaking. there have been changes in interpretation over time. these changes have not been great. The changes. however. do reflect historiographical trends. This find- ing was confirmed and therefore validated by a more objective proce- dure. which involved assigning weights to various interpretations and calculating the scores for each textbook. Both procedures also revealed that the consensus mode has remained the dominant one. This is more true of United States books than of Caribbean books. CHAPTER V NATIONALISTIC BIAS IN THE CONTENT ON UNITED STATES- CARIBBEAN RELATIONS One assumption of this investigation was that the direction of content can also be measured in terms of whether or not or the extent to which a given textbook reflects a national or a global perspective. It was not the intention to examine the relative desirability of either perspective. The intention was rather to determine whether or not or the extent to which high school history textbooks of the United States and of the Commonwealth Caribbean have become less nationalistic over time and to discover which of the two samples of textbooks (United States and Commonwealth Caribbean) was less nationalistic. The following subquestions informed the selection and adapta- tion of the instruments used in the investigation: 1. Does the text present one country as superior and others as inferior? 2. Is one country presented in positive terms while other countries are treated negatively? 3. Does the text treat one country as active and other countries as passive? l28 129 A textbook may be deemed to be nationalistic if the investiga- tion results in an affirmative answer to the questions. Textbooks may be found to be more or less nationalistic over time. and as they become less nationalistic they will begin to treat other countries in a less negative manner. Methodology To carry out a systematic examination of the content. it was first necessary to identify and define categories into which the mate- rial could be grouped. The Garcia-Armstrong matrix system.l was adapted for this purpose. (See Figure 3.) I The next step was to select the target countries. It was decided that in analyzing United States history textbooks. individual Caribbean countries or the Caribbean area in general would be tar- gated.2 and in analyzing Commonwealth Caribbean history textbooks. the United States would be targeted. In carrying out the investigation. all assertions about the targeted countries that appeared in the text on United States-Caribbean relations between 1895 and T939 were identified. Specific assertions about the target country. the government and people of the target country. or about a pronoun whose antecedent was the country or its 1See Garcia and Armstrong (1979). In this system the sentence is the unit of analysis. The instrument used is a nine-category matrix on which the status (superior/equal or inferior) and role (active or passive) assigned to the selected group in a given text may be coded. 'There is a neutral category to be used when neither status nor role is clearly referred to. 2See definition of Caribbean in Chapter I. l30 A.co_um:_m>o xOOauxuu LOm Ecum>m x_cumE unecumsc_mcm .mco_uuoc_o :_ com: Eoum>m x_cuns ..ou-o:.z m mo_cuc:oo ooEmc cacao co umsu coca coco—z co ob .maoo msumum mo co_umu_oc_ N mo_cuc:ou ooEmc cacao mo umcu coca c030. msumum co co_umu_oc_ m a h < h m mo_cuc:oo teem: cocuo m_>-m-m_> maumum Ou monogamoc oz >cucaou uomcmu ecu moN_couumcm;u >u_>_uu< >cucaou uomcmu ecu mo~_couumcmcu >u_>_mmmo >cucoou womcmu co >u_>_mmmo co >u_>_uum o» oucocowoc 02 "m oc:m_u 3 1 O U 131 government or people was included in the analysis} Not included in the analysis were chapters and other headings. illustrations. learning activities. and excerpts from primary sources such as speeches and agreements. Each assertion was then carefully examined to determine which category best described it. It was then assigned to that category. When all the assertions about the target country/area in a textbook were assigned. the percentage of assertions in each category was calculated in relation to the total content space on United States- Caribbean relations from l895 to 1939. mm The system used in this study differed slightly from the Garcia-Armstrong systent Whereas the»Garcia-Armstrong system suggested that the sentence should be the unit of analysis. this study used the assertion. The revised matrix referred to target country rather than target group as in the case of the Garcia-Armstrong system. This study also further classified each of the nine categories as neutral. nega- tive. or positive. This was done by first assigning a 0 rating for no reference to either status or role. Passivity of role or indication of lower status was each assigned -l. while indication of equal or higher status or activity of role was assigned a +l. Each cell combined two characteristics. status and role. For example. Cell lA qualified for —¥ 1"Assertion" was used in this study as in Yu (1951) to mean a statement or "idea-unit" extracted from the text in such a way as to provide a single item of information or thought. .An assertion could be a sentence or a part of a sentence. 132 a double~0. which made it a neutral cell; TB a 0 and a -T. which made it a negative cell: and TC a 0 and a +l. which made it a positive cell. This procedure was carried out in respect to all cells. The result was that three cells fell in each of the categories neutral. negative. or positive as follows: TA neutral 2A negative 3A positive TB negative 28 negative 3B neutral TC positive 2C neutral 3C positive The percentage of assertions in the neutral. negative. and positive cells was also calculated by adding the percentage scores of the neutral. positive. and negative cells. Wm W Category TA. This is a neutral category. All assertions that made no clear reference to the status or role of the target country/area were assigned to this category. Following is an example of a Category lA assertion: "The Virgin Islands were an independent link in the defense of the Panama Canal)‘ (The Virgin Islands is targeted.) Category TB. Assertions were assigned to this category when there was no reference to the status of the target country and when passivity characterized the target country. This is a negatiye category. Following is an example of a Category lB assertion: "It was obvious that certain preliminary steps had to be taken before Cuba could stand on her own feet)‘ (Cuba is targeted.) 133 Category TC. This category was intended for assertions that made no reference to status but that suggested that activity characterized the target country. This is a.oQ§1I1¥§ category. An example of such an assertion is: "The Colombian government rejected it" (the treaty). (Colombia is targeted.) Category 2A. This category was used for assertions that made no reference to activity or passivity of the target country and assigned an inferior status to the target country. This is a negatlye category. An example of a Category 2A assertion is: "Hardly a Caribbean country escaped United States supervision at one time or another between T900 and T930." (Caribbean countries are targeted.) Category 28. This was the W category. It was used for assertions that both assigned inferior status to the target country and treated it as passive. An example of a Category 2B assertion follows: "As the islanders advanced in civilization. more powers were granted to them)‘ (The islanders are targeted.) Category 2C. This category combined both a positive and a negative element and was. therefore. treated as neutral. It was intended for assertions that assigned inferior status to the target country but portrayed it as working to control events. .An example of such assertions is: "Cubans objected to the idea of intervention in their affairs. but there was little they could do about it." (Cubans are targeted.) Ti' 134 Category 3A. Assertions that belonged to this category made no reference to the role of the target country but assigned to it a status equal to or higher than other named groups. It is a 29511112 category. Following is an example of a Category 3A assertion: "The Act made Puerto Ricans citizens of the United States." (Puerto Ricans are targeted.) Category 38. No assertions were found that fit this category. perhaps .‘ri because it implied a relationship between the status and the role of target countries that rarely occurs in historical writing. It was intended for assertions that assigned equal or higher status to the target country while portraying it in a passive role. It is a .neutnal category. Category 3C. ‘This is a xenx_oQ§111x2_QilogoLy to which were assigned assertions that gave equal or higher status to the target country and portrayed it as playing an active role. Following is an example of a Category 3C assertion: "For three years the U.S.A. governed Cuba." The U.S.A. is targeted.) Each assertion in the content on United States-Caribbean rela- tions between T895 and T939 in all of the United States and Common- wealth Caribbean textbooks was assigned to one of the nine categories described above. The writer attempted to maintain consistency in assigning assertions to categories by using Category TA when there was no clear reference to role or status and by adhering strictly to the category definitions. Intracoder reliability was tested by repeating the analysis several weeks later using the l952 edition of the Canfield 135 and Wilder and using Spearman's rho to compare the results of the two applications. The result of the reliability test (rs = .73) indicated that the analysis was only fairly consistent. North et al. (T963) and other specialists in content analysis have suggested that one way to improve reliability is to reduce the number of categories. thus lessening the number of decisions the coder has to make in assigning a unit to a category. It was decided to repeat the analysis. this time using only three categories--neutral. negative. and positive. Neutral was defined as making no clear reference to status or role of the target country. negative as suggesting lower status or passivity of role with respect to the target country. and positive as indicating equal or higher status and activity of role with respect to the target country. All assertions in the content on United States-Caribbean relations (1895-T939) in the United States and Caribbean textbooks were again identified and this time placed from the beginning in one of the three categories described above. This use of a second method/instrument to measure the same variable was also done as a method of assessing the validity of this aspect of the researchfl The closer the results from the two procedures. the higher the validity. The results of both procedures are presented below. 1This method of assessing validity is known as convergent validity. 136 IbLBesults The results of the nine-category procedure are presented in Tables 27 through 32. Tables 27 and 28 give the percentage of asser- tions assigned to each of the nine categories by textbook and period. Tables 29 and 30 sununarize the results from Tables 27 and 28. respec- tively. by period totals only. Table 3T summarizes the results from all United States and Commonwealth Caribbean textbooks for ease of comparison. Table 32 also provides comparative data on the two samples of textbooks. In this table. percentages from the neutral. negative. and positive cells presented in Table 3T are combined. thus reducing the number of categories to three. 'This was done so that the general trend of the content in the two samples could be easily observed. .Any errors due to inconsistency reflected in Table 31 would also be reflected in Table 32 since both tables were constructed from data yielded by the same procedure. The results of the three-category procedure are presented in Tables 33 through 37. Tables 33 and 34 give the percentage of asser— tions assigned to each of the three categories by textbook and period. Tables 35 and 36 summarize the results from Tables 33 and 34. respec- tively. by period totals only. Table 37 summarizes the results from all United States and Commonwealth Caribbean textbooks for ease of comparison. Table 38 compares the results from Tables 32 and 37. 137 Table 27.--Percentage of assertions in the content on United States- Caribbean relations (1895-1939) in United States history textbooks falling in each of nine categories, by period and textbook. Period Textbook Category Total 1A 18 1C 2A 28 2C 3A 3B 30 z ‘ I°dd 5 Curti 47.8 o 11.1 14. 9.3 16.8 o o 0.9 100. 950 Canfield 8 Wilder 1952 34. 0.9 7.6 15. 29.7 7. 0.3 0 4.6 100. Bragdon 8 McCutchen 42. 2.7 7.4 28. 3.4 8. l.4 O 6.1 100. 1954 Graff 8 Krout 1959 49. o 12.1 32. 2.8 3 o o o 100. Period total 42. 0.0 9.6 21. 13.6 8 0.3 0 2.7 100. 2 Bragdon 8 McCutchen 42. 2.7 7.4 28. 3.4 8 1.4 O 6.1 100. 1961 Wade, Wilder, Wade 1966 57. 0 4.4 12. 18.9 6 O 0 ]_3 100. Todd 5 Curti 1966 47. 0 11.1 14. 9.3 16. 0 0 0.9 100. Graff 8 Krout 1968 48. 0 13.2 32. 2.6 3 0 0 0 100. Period total 50. 0.4 8.5 20. 10.2 8. 0.2 0 1.6 100. 3 Wade, Wilder, Wade 1972 57. 0 4.4 12. 18.4 6. 0 0 1.3 100. Bragdon 8 McCutchen 42. 3.4 7.3 24. 6.8 8 1.1 O 5.1 100. 1973 Graff 8 Krout 1973 48. 0 13.2 32. 2.6 3 0 0 0 100. Todd 8 Curti . . . 11.0 1 . 0 0 0.4 100. 1977 44 0 ll 4 15 7 Period total 50. 0.6 8.5 20. 11.0 8. 0.2 0 1.4 100. T°ta' f°r 48. 0.5 8.9 20. 11.6 8 0.2 o 1.7 100. all periods ‘2 Tat The all I 138 Table 28.--Percentage of assertions in the content on United States- Caribbean relations (1895-1939) in Commonwealth Caribbean history textbooks falling in each of nine categories, by period and textbook. Period Textbook Category Toéal 1A 18 TC 2A 28 2C 3A 38 3C 1 Parry 8 Sherlock 1956 22.3 2.8 64.6 0 0 0 1.7 0 8.6 100.0 Period total 22.3 2.8 64.6 0 O 1.7 O 8.6 100.0 2 Augier,Gordon et a1. 1960 11.0 3.4 79.7 0 0 0 0.8 0 5.1 100.0 Garcia 1965 17.0 4.2 41.5 1.1 O 36.2 100.0 Period total 13.7 3.8 62.7 0.9 O 18.9 100.0 3 Murray 1971 13.6 4.5 54.6 0 O 0 O 0 27.3 100.0 Parry 8 Sherlock 197] 22.3 2.8 64.6 0 0 0 1.7 0 8.6 100.0 Sherlock 1973 16.4 1.6 72.2 8.2 0 1.6 100.0 Period total 20.2 2.7 65.6 3.1 0 8.5 100.0 Total for 18.6 all periods 3.164.6 0 0 0 2.0 011.9 100.0 Table 29.--Percentage of assertions in the content on United States- Caribbean relations (1895-1939) in United States history textbooks falling in each of nine categories, by period. Category p . Total ermd 1A 18 10 2A 213 20 3A 3B 30 z T 42.9 0.7 9.6 21.6 13.6 8.6 0.3 0 2.7 100.0 2 50.9 0.4 8.5 20.2 10.2 8.0 0.2 0 1.6 100.0 3 50.0 0.6 8.5 20.0 11.0 8.3 0.2 0 1.4 100.0 TOtal for 6‘ 1 periods \ 48.1 0.5 8.9 20.6 11.5 8.3 0.2 0 1.7 100.0 139 Table 30.--Percentage of assertions in the content on United States- Caribbean relations (1895-1939) in Caribbean history text- books falling in each of nine categories, by period. . Category Total Pe"°d 1A 18 10 2A 28 20 3A 38 3c 2 1 22.3 2.8 64.6 _0 1.7 0 8.6 100 0 2 13.7 3.8 62.7 0 0.9 0 18.9 100.0 3 20.2 2.7 65.5 0 3.1 0 8.5 100.0 Tf’ta' f°r 18.6 3.1 64.4 0 0 0 2.0 0 11.9 100.0 all periods ‘reable 3l.--Tota1 percentage of assertions in the content on United States-Caribbean relations in United States and Commonwealth Caribbean history textbooks falling in each of nine categories. Category Total 1A 18 10 2A 28 20 3A 3B 3C 2 United States 48.1 0.5 8.9 20.6 11.5 8.3 0.2 0 1.9 100.0 Caribbean 18.6 3.1 64.4 0 0 0 2.0 0 11.9 100.0 Table 32.--Genera1 direction of the content on United States-Caribbean relations (1895-1939) in United States and Commonwealth Caribbean history textbooks.a \ -———___, Neutral Negative Positive Total United States 56.4 32.6 11.0 100.0 Caribbean 18.6 3.1 78.3 100.0 \ a O O C ‘: These percentages were derived by combining percentages for the hree negative categories, the three neutral categories, and the three Qsitive categories. 140 Table 33.--Percentage of neutral, negative, and positive assertions in the content on United States-Caribbean relations (1895-1939) in United States history textbooks, by textbook and period. Period Textbook Category Togal Neutral Negative Positive 1 Todd 8 Curti 1950 47.6 27.7 24.7 100.0 Canfield 8 Wilder 1952 43.2 43.9 12.9 100.0 Bragdon 8 McCutchen ‘95“ 49.7 38.2 12.1 100.0 Graff 8 Krout 1959 52.8 35.6 11.6 100.0 Period total 47.8 36.9 15.3 100.0 2 Bragdon 8 McCutchen 1961 49.7 38.2 12.1 100.0 Wade, Wilder, Wade Todd 8 Curti 1966 47.6 27.7 24.7 100.0 Graff 8 Krout 1968 52.5 36.1 11.4 100.0 Period total 51.0 33.1 15.9 100.0 3 Wade, Wilder, Wade 1972 53.4 31.9 14.7 100.0 Bragdon 8 McCutchen 1973 50.3 37.8 11.9 100.0 Graff 8 Krout 1973 52.5 36.1 11.4 100.0 Todd 8 Curti 1977 46.2 29.6 24.2 100.0 Period total 50.7 33.6 15.7 100.0 ‘jrc>tal ‘For all periods 49.8 34.6 15.6 . 100.0 \ Tat Per Tote Tabil Total 141 Table 34.--Percentage of neutral, negative, and positive assertions in the content on United States-Caribbean relations (1895-1939) in Commonwealth Caribbean history textbooks, by textbook and period. Category Total Period Textbook Neutral Negative Positive % 1 Parry 8 Sherlock 1956 22.6 6.5 70.9 100.0 Period total 22.6 6.5 70.9 100.0 3 Augier, Gordon et a1. 1960 18.2 5.6 76.2 100.0 Garcia 1965 23.0 8.0 69.0 100.0 Period total 20.4 6.6 73.0 100.0 3 Murray 1971 16.6 4.2 79.2 100.0 Perry 8 Sherlock 22.6 6.5 70.9 100.0 1971 Sherlock 1973 26.5 4.4 69.1 100.0 Period total 23.0 5.9 71.1 100.0 Total for all periods 22.0 6.3 71.7 100.0 Table 35.--Percentage of neutral, negative, and positive assertions in the content on United States-Caribbean relations (1895-1939) in United States history textbooks, by period. Period Neutral Negative Positive Togal 1 47.8 36.9 15.3 100.0 2 51.0 33.1 15.9 100.0 50.7 33.6 15.7 100.0 Total for all periods 49.8 34.6 15.6 100.0 \ 142 Table 36.--Percentage of neutral, negative, and positive assertions in the content on United States-Caribbean relations (1895-1939) in Commonwealth Caribbean history textbooks, by period. Period Neutral Negative Positive Togal 1 22.6 6.5 70.9 100.0 2 20.4 6.6 73.0 100.0 3 23.0 5.9 71.1 100.0 Total for all periods 22.0 6.3 71.7 100.0 Thable 37.--Total percentage of neutral, negative, and positive assertions in the content on United States-Caribbean relations (1895-1939) in United States and Commonwealth Caribbean history textbooks. Neutral Negative Positive Toéal Lhwi‘ted States 49.8 34.6 15.6 100.0 Caribbean 22.0 6.3 71.7 100.0 Table 38.--Comparison of results from the nine-category and three- category analyses. Neutral Negative Positive Nine- Three- Nine- Three- Nine- Three- Category Category Category Category Category Category Uh't tétzg 56.4 49.8 32.6 34.6 11.6 15.6 Caribbean 18.6 22.0 3.1 6.3 78.3 71.7 \ 15135 98 St. 1110 pe: C01 ha» 1481 C01. 5011 19) Cha hlg gen 155 of , Per. new the Cite 143 WWW—in Wigwam: The findings from the nine-category analysis showed some broad general characteristics in the direction of the content on United States-Caribbean relations in United States history textbooks. The most striking perhaps was that there was very little variation between periods (see Table 29) in the percentages of assertions in each category. Indeed. the variation was so slight that it could mainly have been a function of the relatively low reliability of the instru- ment. which the rho figure suggested. The small amount of variation could also have been due to the fact that different editions of the same texts were examined in each of the three periods and that these texts had not been extensively revised. The findings discussed in Chapters III and IV supported this explanation. Table 27 shows that for all the United States texts. the highest percentage of assertions fell in the neutral Category TA. The general trend was for each textbook to have a similar percentage of assertions in Category TA from period to period. The Canfield and Wilder/Wade. Wilder 8 Wade was an exception to this as the percentage 0f assertions in Category TA increased steeply from 34.3 to 57.8 Percent between Periods l and 2. This text. therefore. became more neutral over time. For all the texts. the next largest categories were the negative Categories 2A and 28. This suggests a high percentage of negative assertions about the Caribbean. Conversely. the percentages f0? the positive categories were low. This was particularly true of categories 3A and 3C. suggesting that few assertions treated the C1 111 bL—j 0’0- 31 144 Caribbean countries as equal to or higher in status than other named countries. These findings suggest that the Uni ted States textbooks were nationalistic and that they did not become less nationalistic over time. The global education movement had little effect on them up to 1979. These findings were supported by the findings of the three- category procedure (see Tables 33 and 35). These tables also show the T ack of variation over time. the preponderance ofthe neutral category. and the increasing blandness of the Canfield and Wilder/Wade. Wilder. and Wade over time. Table 35 shows that for each period the percentage of negative assertions about the Caribbean was more than twice the percentage of positive statements. WWW Whom: Even though only one of the Caribbean texts had revised edi- ti ons between 1950 and 1979. the consistency of the results from one Period to the other that was apparent with respect to the United States texts was also manifested in the Caribbean books (see Tables 28 and 30% There were. however. a number of striking differences. Whereas when the United States texts were analyzed only one category. Category 3 Be remained blank. when the Caribbean texts were analyzed. four categories were not used: 2A. 28. 2C. and 3B. This can be explained by the fact that in the case of the Caribbean countries. the United s‘l-‘-ates was the target country. and no Caribbean text contained a single §‘s=~=er‘tion that portrayed the United States as being lower in status 145 than other countries. The high percentages in Categories TA. 18. and ‘I C suggest that they tended not to make clear references to status. The highest percentages of assertions were assigned to Category TC. which suggests that the United States was treated positively. The findings. therefore. suggest that Caribbean textbooks were biased favorably toward the United States. and this did not change over time. They cannot. therefore. be said to be nationalistic and are a good example of reverse nationalistic bias. WNW .QaLioooaLdistocLlextoooksfiomoacod Tables 31. 32. and 37 show this comparison. Table 31 shows the striking differences between United States and Caribbean textbooks in the percentages of assertions in Categories TA. TC. 2A. 28. and 3C. Table 31 shows cl early that the United States textbooks were more neutral than the Caribbean textbooks. Other researchers have attested to the blandness of United States history textbooks (see. for example. F1 tzGeraT d. 1979). Table 32 also shows that the United States text- books made a much higher percentage of negative assertions about the Car1 bbean than did Caribbean textbooks about the United States. and that more than three-quarters of the assertions that the Caribbean textbooks made about the United States were positive. while 11 percent of the assertions in United States textbooks about the Caribbean were p081 ti ve. Table 37. which summarizes the results of the three-category a.hanysis. also illustrates this finding. 1:11:95? '6 the $11 155 uh. a s 011 The 146 It seems reasonable to conclude. therefore. that the Caribbean textbooks were less nationalistic than the United States textbooks. Wits W W These results are summarized in Table 38. Although the figures were not identical. there were no contradictions in the findings from the two procedures (the first using nine categories and the second using three). The results were sufficiently close to validate the use of both procedures. The use of the three-category analysis in this i nvestigation can. therefore. be taken as a test of the reliability of the revised Garci a-Armstrong matrix system. Summon In this chapter an attempt was made to test the hypothesis that the analysis of United States-Caribbean relations in a wider 91 obal context would receive increasing attention over time. It was assumed that the direction of content might be determined in terms of "hath er or not or the extent to which textbooks reflected a national or a global perspective. Nationalistic textbooks would tend to treat other countries in a negative manner. whereas the obverse would be true Where the perspective of the textbook was more global. The investigation began with the classification of all asser- t1 ons (made by United States books about the Caribbean and Caribbean t><>oks about the United States) which appeared in the text on United S”totes—Caribbean relations between 1895 and 1939. Each assertion was the The: (ad 1101 refe nor was 1551' a mu than fore These reana 147 thereby assigned to a cell in the Garcia-Armstrong nine-cell matrix. These cells represented the status (equal and higher or lower) and role (active or passive) attributed to the targeted countries by the asser- tions. Neutral cells were used when neither status nor role was referred to. The hypothesis was nullified as neither United States textbooks nor Caribbean books showed any change in perspective over time: there was little change between periods in the percentage of assertions assigned to each cell. It was found also that the Caribbean books had a much higher percentage of positive assertions about the United States than did the United States books about the Caribbean and could there- fore be said to be less nationalistic than the United States books. These findings were confirmed and validated when the same content was reanalyzed using three categories instead of nine. GMHERVI SUMMARY. CONCLUSIONS. AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summary W The literature on school history textbooks seems strongly to suggest that for most people these textbooks are their major source of information concerning the history of their country and that of others. The literature also suggests that school history textbooks help to shape not only the historical perspectives of those who read them. but also their perceptions of and attitudes toward nations and peoples. The importance of the high school history textbook becomes even more apparent when it is realized that most people do not study history beyond this level. School history textbooks can. therefore. affect international understanding. The purpose of this study was to determine how high school history textbooks of the United States and of the Commonwealth Carib- bean published between 1950 and 1979 have treated the subject of United States-Caribbean relations between 1895 and 1961. It attempted to identify generally the differences that occurred over time in the treatment of the theme of United States-Caribbean relations in high school history textbooks of both the United States and the Common- wealth Caribbean. It attempted also to determine whether there were 148 149 differences between United States and Commonwealth Caribbean history textbooks in the way they treated the theme and to describe these differences. The content of the textbooks selected was analyzed from two standpoints--that of attention and that of direction. With regard to the former. the amount and proportion of space given to the theme as well as to topics within the theme were determined. In determining direction. the textbook treatment of United States-Caribbean relations was analyzed historiographically to identify historiographical trends and to compare the trends identified in the United States texts with those of the Caribbean texts. The direction of the content was examined from a second standpoint. as the study also analyzed the context within which the theme was treated in the textbooks. whether global or national. A search of the literature did not reveal any studies of the treatment of United States-Caribbean relations. although there have been similar studies of the treatment of the relations of the United States with other countries or areas such as the Soviet Union. Japan. Mexico. and Latin America. In focusing on the treatment of United States-Caribbean relations. this study has dealt with an increasingly important content area that has not been previously examined in the present context. bxootbosos The following hypotheses about the content of the textbooks were therefore formulated: th Un be d1 11 he 31 150 1. There has been an increasing amount of attention given to the subject of United States-Caribbean relations in the content of United States and Caribbean history textbooks published or revised between 1950 and 1979. (Attention) 2. There have been changes in the direction of the content directly reflective of historiographical trends. (Direction) 3. The analysis of United States-Caribbean relations in a wider global context (rather than in a purely national. regional. or hemispheric perspective) would receive increasing attention over time. (Direction) Woes Three periods were established within which to analyze the content of the textbooks: Period 1 1950-1959 Period 2 1960-1969 Period 3 T970-T979 A total of 18 textbooks were analyzed. 12 from the United States and 6 from the»Caribbean. ‘There were four United States text- books in each of the three periods. Of the six Caribbean textbooks. there was one in Period 1. two in Period 2. and three in Period 3. The Caribbean textbooks represented the total population of history text- books published during the three periods that met the established criteria. For the United States a small sample of the most widely used textbooks was selected. ‘This was done by identifying those texts that appeared most frequently in samples studied in ten textbook studies 151 published between 1959 and 1979 and that had revised editions in each of the three publishing periods. Attention Attention was determined quantitatively by first measuring the amount of space allotted to United States-Caribbean relations in relation to the total space of each book. Lines were used as the measure of space. Five categories were then identified for the purpose of determining topical emphases. 'The lines allotted to each category were counted and converted into percentages of the total space on United States-Caribbean relations. With respect to attention. this study hypothesized that increasing attention has been given to United States-Caribbean relations in high school history textbooks of each successive period. The results were inconclusive since in some books attention increased over time. while in others the obverse was true. The period totals. how- ever. showed a decrease over time. There were only small differences within the periods between the different United States books. whereas differences between Caribbean textbooks were somewhat more significant. It was found. too. that the Caribbean textbooks devoted a higher per- centage of space to the theme than did the United States textbooks. With respect to topical emphases. two categories. the Spanish- American War and United States Intervention. accounted for over 60 percent of the content on United States-Caribbean relations in United States history textbooks throughout all three periods. The Caribbean textbooks differed from the United States textbooks in that they 152 emphasized the United States Colonial Government category. which receivedT4L8 percent of space when the average for all periods was calculated. The United States and Caribbean textbooks. therefore. differed in the categories they emphasized. In neither case was there any significant change of emphasis in the content over the three periods. .Qinootlon_l Direction was measured qualitatively by first selecting three controversial topics in the history of United States-Caribbean relations with respect to the period 1895 to 1939. 'The treatment of these topics by research historians was analyzed to determine the most common interpretations with respect to the consensus and revisionist modes. The treatment of the three topics in United States and Caribbean high school textbooks was then analyzed to discover whether there had been any changes in interpretation of the topics over time and whether these changes were comparable to historiographical trends. It was also the intention to compare the interpretative trends in the two sets of books. An attempt was made to add an objective dimension to this analysis by identifying 11 major research questions arising from the three topics. as well as the main consensus and revisionist answers to those questions. These answers were used as indicators of the direction of the content. Each revisionist answer was worth a score of -T and each consensus answer a score of'L A continuum of -11 to 11 153 was prepared. Textbooks received scores according to the answers they gave to the questions and fell at different points on the continuum. It was found that all textbooks fell on the right--the consensus side--of the continuunt The United States textbooks were further to the right than the Caribbean textbooks. which were closer to center. All the textbooks were more traditional in their treatment of the Good Neighbor Policy than they were in their treatment of the Spanish-American War and United States Intervention and Dollar Diplomacy. The textbooks became slightly less traditional between the first and second periods. but the change between the second and third periods was not significant. There were. therefore. only slight changes in direction over time in the United States and Commonwealth Caribbean textbooks. although there were differences in direction between the two sets of books. These differences and changes were reflective of major historiographical trends. .DlLQQIIQnJZ This study also attempted to discover whether or not or the extent to which the theme was treated within a wider global context over time. 'This was done in the first instance by classifying into nine categories all assertions (made by United States textbooks about the Caribbean and by Caribbean textbooks about the United States) that appeared in the text on United States-Caribbean relations between 1895 and 1939. The percentage of assertions in each category was calculated in relation to the total content space on United States-Caribbean relations. 1895-1939. The categories represented the status (equal or 154 higher or lower) and role (active or passive) assigned to the targeted countries by the textbooks. Neutral categories were used when neither status nor role was referred to. It was assumed that as textbooks became less nationalistic. they would treat other countries in a more positive manner. and that following the procedure outlined above would result in an understanding of the direction of the content. The procedure was repeated using three categories instead of nine. It was found that the Caribbean textbooks were less nationalis- tic than the United States textbooks in the sense that they had a much higher percentage of positive assertions about the United States than did United States textbooks about the Caribbean. Neither the Caribbean textbooks nor the United States textbooks showed any change in direc- tion over time as there was little variation between periods in the percentages of assertions in each category. Conclusions Based on the above findings. the following conclusions were drawn: 1. Textbooks published between 1950 and 1979 have not changed significantly in their treatment of United States-Caribbean relations. This suggests that the history that children of the United States and of the Commonwealth Caribbean learned from their textbooks in the 19505. 19605. and 19705 had not changed appreciablyo 2. In many ways the history that Caribbean children learn is different from the history that children learn in the United States. 155 The emphases in content are different. Caribbean children learn more about the United States as a colonial power than do children in the United States. At the same time. children in the United States spend most of the time allotted to United States-Caribbean relations. reading about the rise of their country as a world power and the related exploits. Since neither the United States nor Caribbean textbooks present the more negative aspects of colonialism/imperialism in any detail. both United States and Caribbean children are presented with a positive picture of the United States as a colonial power. 3. Although the amount of space devoted to United States- Caribbean relations is small. this amount of coverage compares favor- ably with the treatment of the relations between the United States and countries like Japan and the Soviet Union during the same period. 4. Although the percentage coverage on United States-Caribbean relations is greater in the Caribbean books. the coverage in the United States books is more detailed. This is related to the fact that the United States books are so much bigger that even though the percentage of space on the theme is smaller. the actual number of lines is greater. 5. Although the Caribbean books had a much higher percentage of positive assertions about the United States than did the United States books about the Caribbean. this difference cannot be attributed to the effect of the global education movement. The causes may perhaps be found in the history of the Commonwealth Caribbean. 156 6. 'There was agreement between textbooks (particularly in the case of the United States books) in the way the theme was treated. This was true of all three measures of treatment. The textbooks were more like one another in content than they were different. 7. In all the textbooks. emphasis is given overwhelmingly to political relations and to a considerably less extent economic rela- tions. while little consideration is given to social and cultural relations. Beoomondations The following recommendations are related to high school history curriculum. 1. The school textbook version of history does not necessarily bear a close relationship to academic history. Textbook authors and developers need to bring the history in school textbooks more closely in line with historical research and interpretation. and develop textbooks that present more than one interpretation of significant events. issues. and policies in history. There is a need for academic historians to take a keener interest in history as it is presented in school textbooks. 2. The findings of this investigation also have implications bearing on the selection of textbooks. A superficial study of less popular textbooks and of more recently published textbooks has shown that many are less traditional in their interpretations than those analyzed in this study. but particularly in the United States. the more traditional textbooks still dominate the scene. Instead of a single 157 textbook. a variety of textbooks and other learning resources should be used. Textbooks are to be preferred that present a variety of inter- pretations or primary source material on the basis of which students may make their own interpretations. Students should be encouraged to reflect on these interpretations. This goes beyond mere mastery of facts to the examination of underlying factors. 3. The textbooks examined seemed to reflect heavily one interpretation or answer to significant historical questions where the review of academic historians carried out for this study showed there is more than one. Teachers need to become cognizant of these interpre- tations in order to supplement the textbook. Teachers need to become knowledgeable about the prevailing climate of opinion and influences that give rise to the various interpretations. This could well form part of the agenda for the continuing education of history teachers. 4. Senior students in high school should be introduced to historiography so that they can better understand the tentative nature of history. History is not fixed. It is constantly changing as it reflects the climate of opinion in which it is written. A number of benefits should accrue from such a course of action. sttory will become more meaningful and school history and academic history of the college and university will be brought closer together. The study of historiography will be particularly stimulating to the good student and should promote reflective thought and intellectual alertness. At the same time. students will develop the ability to deal with historical materials and form reasoned judgments The theme on which this study 158 focused. because of its controversial nature. is a suitable one for introducing students to history through its interpretations. 5. The preceding recommendation has implications for teacher preparation as it follows that if historiography is to be introduced at the high school level it must first form an important part of the preparation of history teachers. 6. ‘The theme of United States-Caribbean relations deals with highly complex concepts in history such as isolationism. imperialism. Social Darwinism. and Manifest Destiny. Teachers should have. as part of their aims for teaching this theme. that students should grow in their understanding of these concepts. This can only comeras a result of historical investigation of related ideas. events. and circum- stances. 7. Journal editors should encourage regular reviews of school textbooks. Finally. the following recommendations are offered for future study. T. Bearing in mind that most people do not read history textbooks beyond the high school level. it might be useful to examine the effects of other influences such as the mass media on the formation of attitudes toward foreign cultures. At the same time. additional work needs to be done on developing instruments taineasure bias in textbooks. 2. The Caribbean textbooks have been shown to be very positive in their assertions about the United States and have been deemed to be 159 less nationalistic than the United States books. It would be interest- ing to see what the results would have been if the nationalistic bias toward the French- or Spanish-speaking Caribbean had been analyzed. This could form the basis for a future study. 3. This study did not examine other types of instructional materials used in teaching about United States-Caribbean relations. These other materials should also be analyzed. 4. Last. the analysis of textbook content is a relatively new area of research for the Caribbean. More recently published history textbooks should now be analyzed. and there is a need for the examina- tion of the treatment of other themes/topics in history textbooks as well as in other types of social studies textbooks. The possibilities appear to be almost limitless. APPENDICES T60 APPENDIX A TEN HISTORY TEXTBOOK STUDIES PUBLISHED BETWEEN 1959 AND 1979. USED IN THE SELECTION OF TEXTBOOKS 161 162 Root, E. Merrill. Brainwashing in the High Schools: An Examination of American History Textbooks. New York: The Devin-Adair Co., 1959. Perrone, Vito. Image of Latin America: A Study_of American School Textbooks and School Children, Grades Two Through Twelve. Northern Michigan University, 1965. Weischadle, David E. ”American History in Our Secondary School Text- books: A Philosophical Approach.” The Social Studies 58 (February 1967). Costo, Rupert (Ed.). Textbooks and the American Indian. American Indian Historical Society, Indian Historian Press, Inc., 1970. Trecker, Janice Law. "Women in United States History High School Textbooks." Social Education 35 (March 1971). Peiser, Andrew C. "Populism in High School Textbooks.” Social Education 37 (April 1973). Michigan Department of Education. Study of Elementary and Secondary Sgcial Studies Textbooks. Lansing: Michigan Department of Education, 1973. Kambayashi, Kikuka. "The Expansion of Treatments of Japan in High School Textbooks in American History, 1951-1972.” Ph.D. disser- tation, University of Michigan, 1973. Anyon, Jean. ”Ideology and United States History Textbooks.“ Harvard Educational Review 49 (August 1979). FitzGeraTd, Frances. America Revised: History Schoolbooks in the Twentieth Century, Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1979. APPENDIX B PAGE-LINE COUNTING GUIDE 163 164 LENGTH OF LINE 3/4 SSS. 1V4 L2 SwSuSsSMS. e l .0. no 88 .09. C te ue Cr. CF M a d H..... 1 a0 0 d Dye or ..00 . gtl BS6 r.19 BHl .S.S..S m: :2: 78 22 Sn 30 345 333 ”was? APPENDIX C FORM FOR TABULATING RESULTS OF DETERMINING ATTENTION 165 166 Results sheet ATTENTION TEXTBOOK: Canfield, Leon H and Howard B. Wilder The Making_0f Modern America Cambridge,Massachusetts: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1952 TOTAL CONTENT PAGES 573 SAMPLING FRACTION 1/5 NO. OF PAGES IN THE SAMPLE 114 NO. OF LINES IN THE SAMPLE 7548.5 AVERAGE NO. OF LINES PER PAGE 66.2 TOTAL ESTIMATED NO. OF LINES IN THE BOOK 37941.1 LINES ALLOTTED T0 UNITED STATES/CARIBBEAN RELATIONS 1294.5 PERCENT OF SPACE ALLOTTED T0 UNITED STATES/ CARIBBEAN RELATIONS 3.41 Space allotted to categories in the content on United States/Caribbean Relations Category Lines Percent T Sp. Am. War 319.75 23.9 2 U.S. intervention 541.25 40.5 3 Good Neigbor Policy 51.75 3.9 4 Colonial Government 309.50 23.2 5 Pan Americanism 98.25 7.4 APPENDIX 0 CATEGORY DEFINITIONS 167 I68 CATEGORY DEFINITIONS 1. The Spanish-American War Category Hostilities in the Caribbean beginning in 1895 with the outbreak of the Spanish-Cuban War. The incidents and circumstances which led to the involvement of the United States. The involvement of the United States. The War in the Caribbean. The Treaty of Paris. 2. The United States Intervention Categogy Diplomatic and Military Intervention particularly with respect to the following: The Venezuelan incidents 1895-6, 1902 The Roosevelt Corollary Dollar Diplomacy The Acquisition of the Canal The Interventions in Cuba. Nicaragua, Haiti, The Dominican Republic Guatemala The Bay of Pigs The Cuban Missile Crisis 3. The Good Neighbor Poligy Category The origins and development of the policy Manifestations of the policy e.g the Clark Memorandum the Montevideo Conference the Withdrawal of Marines the Abrogation of the Platt Amendment Treaties e.g with Columbia the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act 169 The United States Colonial Government Category The acquisition of colonies and protectorates Government of colonies and protectorates particularly Cuba and Puerto Rico The Pan-Americanism and Hemigpheric Defense Catgggry, The Destroyer/base deal The Declaration of Panama The Act of Havana The Alliance for Progress The Caribbean Commission The Organization of American States BIBLIOGRAPHY 170 BIBLIOGRAPHY WW Bragdon. Henry W.. and McCutchen. Samuel P. .flistozy of a Enee People. New York: Macmillan. 1954. T961. T973. Canfield. Leon H.. and Wilder. Howard B. .Ih9 Making of Modern Amenica. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin Co.. 1952. Graff. Henry F.. and Krout. John A. .Adyentune of the Amenican Beagle. Chicago: Rand McNally Co.. T959. T968. 1973. Todd. Lewis P.. and Curti. Merle. Ease of the American Nation. New York: Harcourt. Brace and World. Inc.. T950. T966. 1977. Wade. Richard; Wilder. Howard; and Wade. Louise. .A.H1§tony.of.the _United States. New York: McGraw—Hill. T966. T972. Walnuts Augier. F. R.; Gordon. S. C.; Hall. 0. G.; and Reckord. M. .Ine Making .Qf.1he West Indies. Longman Caribbean. 1960. Garcia. A. .6.fliSIQ£¥.QI.Ih§.H§SI Indies. London: Harrap. 1965. Murray. R. W. .Nelsonls West Indian Histozy. London: Nelson. 1971. Parry. J.. and Sherlock. P. .A.§nQ£I.HISIQL¥.oi.tbe.West Indies. London: Macmillan. 1956. 1971. Sherlock. P. .West Indian Nations. Kingston: Jamaica Publishing House. 1973. 171 172 . A no - ‘ 0 = =0 I I“ n 0 00 --| - .1- Bemis. Samuel Flagg. Ihe.Latin.American.Eoliex.ei.tbe.United.States:: An1H151grical.lnteroretation. New York: Harcourt. Brace 8 Co.. 1943. Corbitt. Duvon C. "Cuban Revisionist Interpretations of Cuba's Struggle for Independence." lhe Hispanic American Historical Renew 43 (1963). Cronon. David. "Interpreting the Good Neighbor Policy: The Cuban Crisis of 1933." Hisoanisnmecieanfljstoriealfieuiew 39 (November 1959): 538-67. Curti. Merle. .Ihe.§rowth.of.fimerican.Ihought.i New York: Harper and Brothers. 1943. Foner. Philip 5. "Why the United States Went to War With Spain in 1898."InEasJ:ImoeL£eetiAlternatheEssastnAmerioanfiistorx Enomfleconstruciien intbefiresent. Vol. 2. Edited by Blanch Wiesin Cook. Alice Kessler Harris. and Ronald Radosh. New York: Alfred Knopf. 1973. Gardner. Lloyd C. "American Foreign Policy 1900-21: A Second Look at the Realist Critique of American Diplomacy." In Iguanas a New East; Dissenting Essays in American History. Edited by Barton J. Bernstein. New York: Vantage Books. 1969. . "A Haven for Markets and Investments." In Majgr.ELlegms in.Amerigan Eoreign Policy. Edited by Thomas G. Patterson. Lexington. Mass.: 0. C. Heath 8 Co.. 1978. Green. David. .Ihe.Containment.oi.Latin.Amer1oa1.A.Histor¥.e£.tbe Mhsandfiefliijesoftnefioodfleigbborfiolicx. Chicago: Quadrangle Books. 1971. Hofstadter. Richard. "The Psychic Crisis of the 1890's." In M3191 Emblems in American foreign EoJJex. Edited by Thomas G. Peterson. Lexington. Mass.: 0. C. Heath 8 Co.. 1978. Knight. Franklin. Ins Canibbeam lbe Genesis of a Ecagmented Nation: ,alism. New York. 1978. Kolko. Gabriel. Main Currents in Modern American History. New York: Harper 8 Row. Publishers. 1976. LaFeber. Walter. Ihe Banana Canal: Ine Crisis in Iiistonieal Escapes: .tiye. New York: Oxford University Press. 1978. I73 "Preserving the American System." In.M319E-E£9419m5-ln .American.£oreign.Eglicy. Edited by Thomas G. Paterson. Lexington. Mass.: 0. C. Heath 8 Co.. 1978. Lane. Jack. "Instrument for Empire: The American Military Government in Cuba. 1899-1902." Science and Society 36 (Fall 1972). Maldonado-Denis. Manuel. Euerin Rico; A Sociczhistocic Internets: .Iicn. New York: Vantage Books. 1972. Morley. Morris. "Dependence and Development in Puerto Rico." In .Euertg.81cg.ang Puerto Ricans. Edited by Adalberto Lopez and James Petras. New York: John Wiley 8 Sons. 1974. Munoz. Marin Luis. "The Sad Case of Puerto Rico." Ihe American .Mencury 16 (February 1929). Munro. G. "Dollar Diplomacy in Nicaragua. 1909-1913." Hispanic American Historical Renew 38 (May 1958)- Munro. Dana G. Ibe.United.States.and.tne.Caribbean.Beoublics.1921: 1933. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 1974. . "In Search of Security." In Majgr Problems in Amenican .Egreign.Eglicy. Edited by Thomas G. Paterson. Lexington. Mass.: 0. C. Heath 8 Co.. 1978. Nearing. Scott. and Freeman. Joseph. .Dgllar.Qiolomacx1.A.SIudx in .American Imperialism. New York: B. W. Huebsch and the Viking Press. 1925. Paterson. Thomas G. . ed. American ImoeriaJJsm and Antisimoecialism. New York: Thomas Crowell Co.. 1973. Perez. Louis A.. Jr. "Intervention. Hegemony and Dependency: The United States in the Circum-Caribbean. 1898-T980." EocliiC Historical Bexiew 51 (May 1982)- Perkins. Dexter. .Ihe United States and the Caribbean. Cambridge. Mass.: Harvard University Press. 1947. Silen. Juan Angel. HeLIneEuertoBJcanEecoleantorycICoocessien .and Resistance. Translated by Cedric Belfrage. New York: Monthly Review Press. 1971. Smith. Robert Freeman. lbs LS. and Cuba; Business and Cielcmacx. 1911:1950. New York: Bookman Associates. 1960. ________. "Twentieth Century Cuban Historiography." flifigjnig'flmgnignn .fllSIQLiCel.Bexlen 44 (February 1964). 174 *. "American Foreign Relations. T920-42." In Iggards.a New Best. C1ssenting Essays in American History. Edited by Barton J. Bernstein. New York: Vantage Books. 1969. Williams. Eric. Brliishflistoriansandtheliestlndies. London: Andre Deutsch. 1966. _S____. lnuardHungeulheEducaiionofaErimeHinister. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1969. Williams. William Appleman. MWWMMMM EssayontheDynamicsofBeyolutjonandrheDlssolotionofEmoire. New York: Monthly Review Press. 1962. S___. The Contours of American History Chicago: Quadrangle Books. 1966. . lheBootsofIheHodernAmericanEmoire. New York: Random House. 1969. Wood. Bryce. .Ihe.Mak1ng.o£.the.fiood.Neighhor.Eolicy- New York: Columbia University Press, 1962. SelectesLBeterehces Books Anderson. Lee. Schooling and Citizenship .in a Global Age. Blooming— ton: The Mid-America Program for Global Perspectives in Educa- tion. 1978. Baxter. Maurice G.; Ferrell. Robert I-L; and Wiltz. John E. Ibo leaching of American History in High Schools.Bloan1ngton: Indiana University Press. 1964. Berel son. Bernard. Content Analysis in Communication Research. Glencoe: The Free Press. 1952. CmmnismislectedWofloHistoulexthookalSZklflC. Ann Arbor: School of Education. University of Michigan. T976. Billington. Ray Allen. Ihe Historians Contribution .to .Mlsunderstanding. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. 1966. Black. Hillel. .Ihe American Schoolbook. New York: William Morrow and Co.. Inc.. 1967. I75 Budd. Richard W.; Thorp. Robert K.; and Donohew. Lewis. .Content .Analysis.oi.Communications. New York: Macmillan. l967. Carpenter. Charles. .History of American Schoolbooks. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. 1963. Deutsch. Karl W.. and Merritt. Richard. "Effects of Events on National and International Images." In Internatlgn l.Behayiors.A.Socio: .Esychological,Ana1ysis. Edited by Herbert C. Kelman. New York: Holt. Rinehart and Winston. 1965. Donovan. Timothy Paul. Historical Ihought in Americas Best Hal: Patterns. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. l973. Doob. Leonard W. Eatriotism and Nationalism: Iheir Esycholcgical .Egundation. New Haven and London: Yale University Press. l964. Elson. Ruth Miller. Cuerdians oilraditioniAmericanSchothoolcsin .the Nineteenth Century. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. 1964. FitzGerald. Frances. America Heyiseo: History Schoolbooks in the ,Inentieth Century. Boston: Little. Brown & Co.. 1979. Hamilton. Dorothy W. "Educating Citizens for World Responsibilities. 1960-1980." In Citizenshig and a Eree Society; Education to: the future. Edited by Franklin Patterson. Thirtieth Yearbook of the National Council for the Social Studies. l960. Handlin. Iluth.1n History. Cambridge. Mass.: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. 1979. Hayes. Carlton J. H. "Nationalism--Curse or Blessing?" In Nationalism .and International Progress. Edited by Urban G. Whitaker. Jr. San Francisco: Chandler Publishing co.. l96l. . "Bases of Nationalism." In Nationalism and International .Erogress. Edited by Urban G. Whitaker. Jr. San Francisco: Chandler Publishing co.. l96l. Healy. David. Modern Imperialism Changing Styles in Historical .Interoretation. Washington. 0.0.: Service Center for Teachers of History. l967. Higham. John. Writing American History: Essays on Modern Scholarship- Bloomington: Indiana University Press. l970. 176 ____. et al. HistomlheCereloomentoinstoricalStudies in.the.fln1ted States. Englewood Cliffs. N.J.: Prentice-Hall. l965. Kohn. Hans. "A New Look at Nationalism." In Nationalism and.1nter: .natlonal.£rogress. Edited by Urban G. Whitaker. Jr. San Francisco: Chandler Publishing Co.. 1961. Mannheim. Karl. Ideology and utopia: An Introduction to the Sociology .of.&nonledge. New York: Harcourt. Brace and World. 1963. Nietz. John A. .Qld.Iextbooks. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press. l96l. North. Robert: Holsti. Ole; Zaninovich. M.: and Zinnes. Dina. .Qontent AnalysistAHandbgokHithAoolicationsiortheStddygiInteI: .national.Crisis. Evanston. Ill.: Northwestern University Press. 1963. Palmer. John R. "American History: Potential for Inquiry but Little Fulfillment." In.Social.Stddies.in.the.United.Statest.A.Critical .ACCLdlSdl. Edited by C. Benjamin Cox and Byron G. Massialas. New York: Harcourt. Brace A World. 1967. Pierce. Bessie Louise. Clylc.A1111udCS.1n.AmeniCdn.5ChCCl.ICxICCCkS. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. 1930. Shafer. Boyd C. "Toward a Definition of Nationalism." In Nationalism .and.International.Erogress. Edited by Urban G. Whitaker. Jr. San Francisco: Chandler Publishing Co.. l96l. Skotheim. Robert Allen. ed. .Ihe Historian and.the.Cleate. I Qpinion. Reading. Mass.: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.. l969. Ward. Barbara. .Spaceship Earth. New York: Columbia University Press. 1966. Whitaker. Urban 6- . Jr. Nationalism and International Progress. San Francisco: Chandler Publishing Co.. 1961. Yu. Frederick Teh—Chi. "The Treatment of China in Four Chicago Daily Newspapers. July 1 Through December 31. 1949." Ph.D. disserta- tion. 1951. Cited in Budd. Richard. and Thorp. Robert. .An .lntreddctlon.19.CentenI.Ana1ysis. State University of Iowa. 1963. 177 W W Alexander. Albert. "The Gray Flannel Cover on the American History Textbooks." M Education 24 (January l960). Anyon. Jean. "Ideology and United States History Textbooks." ‘Haryard Educational Beyiey 49 (August 1979)- Becker. James M.. and East. Maurice. .Globa1.Qimensions.in.United States Education: Ihe Secondary School. Center for War/Peace Studies. l972. Brodbelt. Samuel. "Global Interdependence--Increasing Student Aware- ness." lhe‘figg1a1.§tud1es 72 (May/June 1981). Crowe. Charles. "The Emergence of Progressive History." ,Journal of .the.flistory of Ideas 27 (January-March 1966): l09-27. Crozier. Brian. "Caribbean Rot." .National.Beyieu. September 5. 1980. Deconde. Alexander. Hen Interpretations in American Eoreign Eclicy. Washington. 0.0.: Service Center for Teachers of History. l969. Degler. Carl N. "Remaking American History." ‘Ihe.lournal.of.American .flistory 67 (June l980): 7-25. deLevy. Lilian. "A New Crescent of Crisis." .florld.Eress.Beyiew (September 1980). Downey. Matthew T. "Speaking of Textbooks: Putting Pressure on the Publishers." .Ihe History Ieacher 14 (November 1980). Farrell. Trevor. "Five of CARIOOM's Major Problems." .Caribhean .antact (March l981). Garcia. Jesus. and Armstrong. David. "Textbook Evaluation: A Simple Procedure for Identifying Treatment of Selected Groups." .Ihe ‘Sgc1a1,51ud1es 70 (January/February 1979). Haniff. Ghulam M. "Education for a Global Society." .Ihe.§CC1dl ,Stndlgs 68(2) (1977). Hanrieder. Wolfram F. "Dissolving International Politics: Reflections on the Nation-State." .American.Eolitical.Science.Beyieu 72 (December 1978). Hanvey. Robert G. .An.AIIdlndhl§.GlChdl.ECCSRCCIIXB. New York: Global Perspectives in Education. 1979. 178 Herz. Martin F. HoutheConHarIslaughtiSixAmericanHistorerxt: books Examined. Washington. D.C.: Georgetown University Ethics and Public Policy Center. 1978. Hogeboom. Willard L. "The New Left and the Revision of American History." ‘Ihe.flistory.leacher 2 (November 1968). Hollingsworth. J. Rogers. "Consensus and Continuity in Recent American Historical Writing." South Atlantic Quarterly 61 (Winter 1962): 40—50. Janis. Juel. "Textbook Revision in the Sixties." .Ieachers College .Becord 72 (December 1970): 289-301. King. Ruby. Human Eroblenszoyeroooulationi A Resource Chit tor .Gnddelfl. Kingston. Jamaica: Ministry of Education. 1974. _______. and Robinson. Pansy. Eood-_-_A Human Problem A Resource Unit .19: Grade 9, Kingston. Jamaica: Ministry of Education. 1971. Krug. Mark M. "Freedom and Equality: A Study of Revised High School History Texts." ‘School.3e11ew 78 (May 1970). Leinwand. Gerald. .Ieaching of World History. Bulletin 54. National Council for the Social Studies. 1978. Maddox. Robert J. "Cold War Revisionism: Abusing History." .Ereedom .at Issue (September-October. 1972). Marcoaldi. Stefano. "Cuba Fans the Flames." .World.Eress.Beyieu (September 1980). May. Ernest R. .American Interyention; 1211 and 124]. Washington. D.C.: Service Center for Teachers of History. 1969. Migdail. Carl J. "Why Latins Are Losing Respect for the U.S." U.S. .Neus.and.fl9£ld.BSCC£t. September 15. 1908. Roskin. Michael. "From Pearl Harbor to Vietnam: Shifting Generational Paradigms and Foreign Policy." ‘Eolitica1.§c1ence.Quarterly 89 (Fall 1974). Russett. Bruce. "The Americans' Retreat From World Power." .Eolitical ScienceCuarterly 90 (Spring 1975)- Schmitt. Hans A. "Perspective: A Note on Historical Judgements." .South Atlantic Quarterly 62 (Winter 1963): 57-66. Spitzer. Alan. "The Historical Problem of Generations." .American .flistorica1.3e11ew (December 1973): l353-85. 179 Stone. Carl. "After Grenada." Ihe Daily Gleaner (Kingston). Novanber 9. 1983 . Tewksbury. Donald G. "American Education and the International Scene." .Ieachersi.Collfige.Record 60 (AP"11 1959). Unger. Irwin. "The 'New Left' and American History: Some Recent Trends in United States Historiography." .American Historical Belle! 72 (July 1967): 1237-63. Weischadle. David E. "American History in Our Secondary School Text- books. A Philosophical Approach." .Ihe.§oc1a1.§tud1es 58 (February 1967). W Gilbert. John Henry. "Changes of the Twentieth Century in the Treat- ment of Foreign Affairs Since 1865 by U.S. History Textbooks for the Seventh and Eighth Grades." PH.D. dissertation. The Univer- sity of Wisconsin. 1955. Meredith. Robert Addison. "The Treatnent of United States-Mexican Relations in Secondary United States History Textbooks Published Since 1956." Ph.D. dissertation. New York University. 1968. Perrone. Vito. "Image of Latin America: A Study of American School Textbooks and School Children. Grades Two Through Twelve." Ph.D. dissertation. Northern Michigan University. 1965. West. Edith. "The Treatment of International Relations in Twelfth Grade Social Studies Textbooks." Ph.D. dissertation. University of Minnesota. 1951. iiiiiiijiiiiyiiiiiiiiilii