By Scott Shephard
Much has been said lately about the toppling or removal of statues of Robert E. Lee, Jefferson Davis and even Christopher Columbus. Some of my friends, especially those on the political right, have bemoaned their removal saying that some, including democrats like me, are trying to “erase” history. As a long-time student and teacher of history, I feel compelled to respond.
I will start with a bit of a trap for some of my readers: I’ve been to Berlin, Germany, several times. There are no statues of Adolph Hitler, no swastikas displayed and no other monuments or museums to the Nazi regime of any kind that I have seen. They have been removed and are now illegal and have been for at least 50 years. Do we remember Hitler and the Nazis?
Another question: Because there are no statues of Robert E. Lee or of Christopher Columbus in Watertown, SD, do the good people of my town not know about Lee or Columbus?
And yet another question: If you are old enough to remember the fall of Baghdad in the 1st Gulf War, you might recall the toppling of the stature of Saddam Hussein in April, 2003. How did you feel? I can’t speak for my conservative friends but I’m guessing few thought, “These vandals are trying to erase history.” I cheered right along with the Iraqi citizens you see in the video. I’ll bet most adult Americans did.
All of this leads to my central question: What is history? Believe it or not, there are many answers. “History is bunk!” (Henry Ford) “History is a set of lies agreed upon.” (Napoleon) “History is written by the victors.” (William Barr quoting Winston Churchill, quoting Herman Goering, quoting Robespierre, etc.)
But I like the original definition of history as posed by the person known as “the father of modern history,” Thucydides (5th century BCE). He said that history is an investigation. The Greek word istoria means “inquiry.” So to me history is less “When was Hitler born?” (April 20, 1889) and more “What was the impact of Hitler?” and even “Was Hitler good or bad for Europe and the world? Or both?” (You can answer those questions on your own.) History is kind of like a trial and historians are the defenders or the prosecutors. The rest of us are the jury, and like good jurors we listen carefully to the testimony and facts, weighing them and rendering a wise, studied judgement.
But, because historians are human and because new evidence appears over time, history is subject to bias and change. I’ll use Columbus as an example. When I was in elementary school, I learned that Columbus “discovered” America and that he was a heroic figure in the story of the founding of our nation. Only later did I learn that before Columbus, there were roughly 50 million native inhabitants in the so-called “new world” and by 1650 there were only 6 million. (Blame the diseases the Europeans brought for most of this but don’t leave out exterminations and enslavement for contributing to the deaths of 44 million natives.) I also learned that Columbus probably died not even knowing he had bumped into a new continent. (What kind of sailor doesn’t know where he/she is?). Finally, I learned that after his third voyage, he was arrested by his sponsors in Spain and stripped of his titles and wealth for trying to deceive the Spanish Crown. He gets a statue?
Would I put a statue of Columbus up in Watertown? Only if I wanted to make a statement to the Native Americans in my town and state. If I did and it was toppled, would they cheer just like I and many others did when Saddam Hussein’s statue fell? No doubt.
But history isn’t a statue or a plaque. We won’t forget Robert E. Lee, the Civil War, Christopher Columbus or even Saddam Hussein if their statues are covered or removed. Neither those who now revere the Confederacy for what it represented nor those who are descendants of liberated slaves will forget, nor will the Iraqis or those who wonder about the legacy of Columbus.
The memory, understanding and history all remain. Such is the nature of history and of the human experience.