to understand the need to cover social changes in Europe
in the years leading up to 1492. They point out that history passed the Vikings by and
devote several pages to the reasons Europe was ready this time “to take advantage of the
discovery” of America, as one textbook puts it. Unfortunately, none of the textbooks
provides substantive analysis of the major changes that prompted the new response.
All but one of the twelve books I examined begin the Columbus story with Marco Polo and
the Crusades. (American Adventures starts simply with Columbus.) Here Is their composite account of what was happening in
Europe:
“Life in Europe was slow paced.” “Curiosity about the rest of the world was at a low
point.” Then, “many changes took place in Europe during the 500 years before Columbus's
discovery of the Americas in 1492,”
“People's horizons gradually widened, and they became more curious about the world beyond
their own localities.” “Europe was stirring with new ideas. Many Europeans were filled
with burning curiosity. They were living in a period called the Renaissance.” “What
started Europeans thinking new thoughts and dreaming new dreams? A series of wars called
the Crusades were partly responsible.” “The Crusades caused great changes in the ways that
Europeans thought and acted.” “The desire for more trade quickly spread.” “The old trade
routes to Asia had always been very difficult.”
The accounts resemble each other closely. Sometimes different textbooks even use the same
phrases. Overall, the level of scholarship is discouragingly low, perhaps because their
authors are more at home in American history than European history. They provide no real
causal explanations for the age of European conquest. Instead, they argue for Europe's
greatness in transparently psychological terms“people grew more curious.” Such arguments
make sociologists smile: we know that nobody measured the curiosity level in Spain in 1492
or can with authority compare it to the curiosity level in, say, Norway or Iceland in 1005.
Here is the account in The American Way.
What made these Europeans so daring was their belief in themselves. The people of Europe
believed that human beings were the highest form of life on earth. This was the
philosophy, or belief, of humanism. It was combined with a growing interest in technology or tools and their uses. The
Europeans believed that by using their intelligence, they could develop new ways to do
things.
This is not the place to debate the precepts or significance of humanism, a philosophical
movement that clashed with orthodox Catholicism. In any case, humanism can hardly explain
Columbus, since he and his royal sponsors were devout orthodox Catholics, not humanists. The American Way tells us, nonetheless, that Columbus “had the humanist's belief that people could do
anything if they knew enough and tried hard enough.” This is Columbus as the Little Engine
That Could!
Several textbooks claim that Europe was becoming richer and that the new wealth led to
more trade. Actually, as the historian Angus Calder has pointed out, “Europe was smaller
and poorer in the fifteenth century than it had been in the thirteenth,” owing in part to
the bubonic plague.
Some teachers still teach what their predecessors taught me forty years ago: that Europe
needed spices to disguise the taste of bad meat, but the bad Turks cut off the spice
trade. Three booksThe American Tradition, Land of Promise, and The American Wayrepeat this falsehood. In the words of Land of Promise, “Then, after 1453, when Constantinople fell to the Turks, trade with the East all but
stopped.” But A. H. Lybyer disproved this statement in 1915! Turkey had nothing to do with
the development ofnew routes to the Indies. On the contrary, the Turks had every reason to
keep the old Eastern Mediterranean
MR. PINK-WHISTLE INTERFERES