Education

Some history books are dry recitation of facts and dates.

Others make them into an attempt to understand the motivations of those involved, how actions shaped history. That can involve what the hoi polloi were doing as much as the leaders. It can involve economics, warfare, climate change, trade patters, demographic shifts, cultural changes and exchanges. Interesting stuff.

Last book I read about American Indian history was aggravating. It was as much advocacy for Native American groups and dwelling on both their virtues and why they were so worthy of respect as much as pointing out how they'd been mistreated. It was as much advocacy and activism as it was education about actual events and what we know happened. When it discussed one archeological dig, it spent as much time on Indian rights in dealing with potential ancestors and the politics involved as it did on what the archeological dig actual showed. And even then it was less "what was there" and more "this shows how advanced the people were and how much they cared." And included tribal leaders' opining on various things. The book was on *prehistory*, meaning Plains Indians before extensive contact with Europeans, Eastern American Native tribes prior to much contact with the British, French, or Spanish.

Such history classes belong in the poli-sci department or an ethnic-studies program, more politics than history, more cultural apologetics than making sense out of what facts meant at the time (or even what facts we know and how trustworthy they are).