Introduction
Stephen Aron is a historian specializing in the history of the American West. He has published several books and essays in various magazines and collections. In particular, the collection of essays American History Now is devoted to the modern view of historians on American history. The purpose of this book is to demonstrate new approaches to the consideration of historical events. Aron’s essay “Frontiers, Borderlands, Wests” is presented as one of the chapters and explores what connotation the interpretation of certain events takes on depending on the context. In particular, the author illustrates his position by examining the evolution of the historical study of the American West.
History Perception Shifts
At the beginning of the article, Aron uses the anniversary of the Clark and Lewis expedition to illustrate how the interpretation of a certain historical event changes depending on the agenda. In particular, it describes the process of how the perception of the importance of the expedition for the American West history changed (Aron, 2011, p. 261, para. 2, lines 1-3). To illustrate the contrast, examples of the centenary and bicentennial anniversaries of Lewis and Clark’s travel and the discussions which have arisen in connection with them are given. Thus, in the twenty-first century, the success and significance of the expedition for history raised doubts among some scholars, in particular Thomas Slaughter (Aron, 2011, p. 261, para. 2, lines 3-4).
In contrast, in the twentieth century, Lewis and Clarke’s mission was perceived in a completely different way, viewed as an achievement of American expansion (Aron, 2011, p. 262, para. 1, lines 7-10). Aron explains such a shift by a change in the historical paradigm, within which a new western history has become dominant, positioning the Americans not as triumphers but as conquerors.
The author continues to describe how, by looking at the various anniversaries associated with historical events, one can examine the shift in their perception and interpretation. In particular, the way the scholars present one or another fact from a completely different perspective corresponds to the modern agenda. For example, the same expedition of Lewis and Clark is considered from the point of view of interaction with the indigenous Indian population (Aron, 2011, p. 262, para. 2, lines 4-6). Aron stresses that interpreting the facts can change the complexion of the history of the American West (Aron, 2011, p. 262, para. 3, lines 1-3). Historians operate with facts and concepts, giving them new definitions, which also endows them with new meanings and significance. Frontiers, borderlands, and Wests are essential terms for the entire history of the West. Thus, their revision by scholars in recent years may profoundly impact the understanding of the region’s whole history.
The author separately notes how different the focus of attention and perception of historical events by the public and historians are. Events that remain unnoticed by many people are fueling a fierce debate in the academic world. Scholars consider each of them with special care at different levels, giving them new and new meanings. Then they present a big picture, which can already impact the general public, as it becomes the modern norm forming special for every period interpretation.
The Revision Process Presented by Aron
To illustrate the process in detail, Aron gives and discusses examples of various events, the significance of which history has been revised at different times. First of all, the terms which have been the basis of the history of the American West for a long time were subjected to rethinking (Aron, 2011, p. 263, para. 1, lines 5-7). In particular, the term frontier, coined by Turner in the late nineteenth century, has dominated Western history for much of the twentieth century (Aron, 2011, p. 263, para. 2). The scholar also sought to designate the West’s territory and divide it into various sections, determining the chronology of the expansion process.
However, his main task was still to study the frontier and its significance for the Americans’ advancement to the West (Aron, 2011, p. 263, para. 2, lines 2-13). It is noteworthy that Turner does not use the concept of borderline, which arose among historians much later (Aron, 2011, p. 263, para. 3, lines 1-3). Thus, the scholar was the first to present and explore the essence of the frontier for American history. He showed it as a line between civilization and savagery, as a symbol of Americanization. However, this approach will lose its popularity in the future and will no longer be relevant.
While Turner considered the Anglo-Americans’ advancement as the sole reason for the success of colonization, his student Bolton had already criticized this narrow perspective. He studied the Spanish borderlines and their movements as significant factors in forming the Great West’s history (Aron, 2011, p. 263, para. 3, lines 5-8). However, the concept did not become as popular as a frontier, remaining a purely academic term. The notion of the frontier, on the contrary, until the middle of the twentieth century, was widely accepted both in public and among historians, becoming a symbol of Americanization.
The end of the century was marked by a change in views on the history of the American West and Turner’s ideas in particular. Many historians have sided with Patricia Limerick, who criticized the term frontier, calling it nationalist and racist (Aron, 2011, p. 265, para. 2, lines 3-5). Thus, arose a stream of new western historians who sought to emphasize the continent’s multiethnic past (Aron, 2011, p. 265, para. 2, lines 14-17). They considered history not from the perspective of the American nation but of the region. The approach was further supported by Richard White, who explored the importance of the federal government in the development of the West (Aron, 2011, p. 265, para. 3, lines 1-4).
He emphasized that for the colonization of the region, it was necessary to expand the power of the state (Aron, 2011, p. 265, para. 3, lines 6-7). Thus, adherents of a new western history sought to eliminate the concept of a frontier, giving the region a less isolated meaning. However, the regionalist approach’s proponents also failed to identify the key characteristics that would separate the West from the rest of America (Aron, 2011, p. 265, para. 4, lines 19-22). During the discussion, scholars suggested that distinctive features exist, but they are not common for the entire West, which gave rise to the concept of many Wests.
Turner’s frontier explained history from a process perspective, a regionalist approach from a place point of view. At the beginning of the twenty-first century, scholars decided to save the notion of the frontier, as it was ingrained in the public mind (Aron, 2011, p. 266, para. 2, lines 2-6). However, they wanted to eliminate the racist connotation, replacing it with an interpretation of it as cultural contact and interaction (Aron, 2011, p. 266, para. 1, lines 10-13). Robert Hine and John Mack Faragher attributed the emergence of various frontiers across North America to a cultural fusion through which Indians, Africans, and Europeans were able to create a multiethnic nation (Aron, 2011, p. 266, para. 2, lines 14-20).
At the same time, the debate around the concept of Bolton’s borderlands was much less acute, involving criticism of Eurocentrism and Hispanophilia (Aron, 2011, p. 267, para. 2, lines 1-5). However, the anniversary of the war between Mexico and the United States has fueled scholarly interest in the concept and has defined it to the present day, highlighting the dynamism and diversity of borderlines culture (Aron, 2011, p. 267, para. 3, lines 1-6). Thus, in recent years, the term proposed by Boltonov has acquired not only global but interdisciplinary connotations.
While the events described have led to a rethinking of concepts and terms, some anniversaries also force people to interpret the past differently. Discussions about the Lewis and Clark expedition provided the public with an idea of North America before colonization as an already inhabited land (Aron, 2011, p. 268, para. 2, lines 4-6). Likewise, the controversy surrounding the significance of Columbus’ journey and discovery and its impact on the continent’s history brought to the fore the voices of the Native Americans (Aron, 2011, p. 271, para. 1-3). Although Columbus has long been a symbol of progress and globalization, his legacy appeared as genocide and the enslavement of indigenous people and Africans by Europeans in the late twentieth century.
Further, the author describes how the history of Mexican California and the Gold Rush has been revised. Emphasis is now placed on racial division and the establishment of the industrial capitalist order, particularly the role of the West in establishing a federal government (Aron, 2011, p. 273, para. 2, lines 1-3). Historians began to pay increased attention to the economic and social roots of violence, which continued after the Civil War (Aron, 2011, p. 273, para. 2, lines 13-16). Thus, scholars were able to revise the old understanding of the colonialists as researchers in favor of suppressors and conquerors.
Conclusion
The process of revising the significance of historical events in the American West history described in the article illustrates how the current agenda affects perception and chronology. Modern historians have significantly expanded the time limits and rethought the critical terms for expansion. If earlier frontiers, borderlands, and Wests were considered symbols of American triumph in the conquest of a new continent exclusively, they are now represented as cultural contact elements. Such changes are inevitable and extremely important as the modern world promotes multiculturalism. In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, scholars have focused on the exclusive role of Americans and the West in history. However, the modern view places them on a par with other ethnic groups and considers their participation in the process of expansion.
Reference
Aron, S. (2011). Frontiers, borderlands, wests. In E. Foner & L. McGirr (Eds.), American history now (pp. 261-284). Temple University Press. Web.