Colony and Empire Comments

I have posted comments on Brian's page and John's page.

Post #7

Capitalism and the West
Reading
Colony and Empire: The Capitalist Transformation of the American West by William G. Robbins

In this reading, William Robbins presents yet another analytical framework through which one can view and analyze the development of the American West. Robbins presents the development of the West, past and present, upon a foundation of Capitalism. Though this was a particularly challenging read, I found that Robbins puts forward a view of the West as the colony of capital that is necessary, at some level, to completely understand the development of the West.

I believe that Robbins strength is his ability to present Capitalist exploitation of the West as a broad theme working throughout its history. In fact, as Dr. Petrik has pointed out, this is a theme that has largely been overlooked by Western historiography. Therefore on some level, I do agree with his statement that, “In essence, history written ‘from the bottom up’ is limited when it ignores larger constellations of power.” (Robbins 8) Social history can easily fall into the trap of focusing upon the minutia. However, I do not believe that it can be abandoned completely for simply a more grandiose vision that in turn focuses on the forest, or maybe more specifically the workings of nature that produce that forest, while forgetting there are individual trees.

That said, I believe that Robbins work is absolutely vital to understanding the development of the West. While I would hate to be labeled the resident Marxist historian, Robbins argument does present invaluable insight into the Capitalist system that clearly played a major role in the development of the West. To dismiss that based upon a bias against Marxist historiography would be a mistake. I doubt that many would argue that the economic and subsequent political systems of mercantilism and colonialism played an overarching role in the development of the American colonies and the resulting revolution. One clearly must understand the systems that those in power are using to interact, control, and govern those with less power. It seems to be a very similar situation with Capitalism in the development of the West. It clearly played a large role as Robbins demonstrates. This role should not be undermined just as it should not be imposed as the sole factor in Western development.

The West is not a simply defined subject, as we have learned throughout this class. Capitalist development is a major theme in defining the West, but it cannot stand alone. Robbins provides invaluable insights, but most importantly he reminds the reader to look at themes that run throughout the history of the West. He reminds us of the unquestionable influence of Capitalism as one of those themes.

Post # 6

Voices of the West
Reading

The Way to the West by Elliot West

In The Way to the West by Elliot West, the reader is once again challenged with the elusive subject of what exactly is the “West”. Thus far we have analyzed the “West” from various angles such as Turner’s frontier and Limerick’s distinct place. In this work, the reader is challenged to look at the “West” as a place that is made up of the inextricable players land, animals, humans, and the stories that portray those human understandings of the place.

I found West’s look at what the stories say about the West to be particularly challenging. One of the themes that came up throughout the book, the desire to view the West as the empty land of “there”, while at the very same time trying to change the land so that it conforms to the comforts and understandings of “here”, is one of the issues that comes out in this debate. West argues that the “West” of the American mindset is more of an idea from the outside that his been imposed upon the “West”. He calls this a “narrative colonialism” and argues that it is, “one of America’s pre-eminent examples of stories as power.” (West 165) This power of the myth is clearly an aspect that colors the picture of the “West” for many.

West looks to another direction, one that caused me to cautiously pause as a historian, in hopes of finding the true “West”. He looks to Walter Prescott Webb for this example. He summarizes Webb's viewpoint into this statement; “everything genuinely important he had to say had come, not from received scholarly truth, but from looking inside his own experience as a westerner.” (West160-161) I agree strongly with West’s argument that one must have an understanding of the real place within one’s study. However, through Webb, Worster, and the many narratives coming from those from the “West”, it would be very easy to take one more step and say that only the subject can truly understand itself based on lived experience. There is a very real danger in such an approach. I know that as an individual, others around me, with a little distance and insight, can often understand me better than I understand myself. On the other hand, every historian does hold vital insights based upon experience that do truly strengthen his or her work. Though West is correct in trying to find the real “West”, a place of connections between the land and the various human and animal inhabitants, we must be careful in limiting the voices that we listen to for the historical record. In short, just as we must be wary of the biases inherent in a vision of the “West” imposed from the outside, we must also be cautious of the biases unintentionally carried within.

I do not believe that West actually goes this far in his analysis, but it did cause me to pause. However, on the whole, I found his analysis to be very insightful. His look at the often overlooked connections and realities of relationship between the land, animals, and human inhabitants provides a much needed insight into unperceived factors that play into western history. In particular, his confrontation of the imposed idea that the “West” was an empty space untouched by human influence is very challenging and necessary.

Post # 5

Cross Examining Roy Baker
Reading

The Coroner’s Inquest Into the Death of Roy Baker

Last week we dealt with the general challenges that a historian faces when using trial deliberations in his or her analysis, with Lubet’s analysis of the trial of the Earp brothers and Doc Holliday. This week’s look at the coroner’s inquest into the death of Roy Baker revealed a number of the more specific issues that a historian must take into account when using such sources. By analyzing these specific challenges, one can gain an even more foundational understanding into methods and means of analysis utilized in the art of history.

The first challenge that becomes painfully obvious is the simple issue of “translating” the written record. Though this document was written relatively legibly, it becomes clear that a foundational aspect of analysis is first accurately deciphering the information available. Without an accurate understanding of the information, historical analysis and interpretation are impossible.

A second issue is simply organizing the information that is available. In any legal case, it is vital to establish a timetable of events. Not surprisingly, this is one of the primary concerns of this coroner’s inquest. However, the historian must also re-create the timetable as an investigator removed from the actual setting, events, and time. This is one of the great challenges in analyzing the Roy Baker case. The reader is encountered with numerous times, which vary greatly based upon the individual being interviewed. This problem is magnified by the lack of accurate time keeping. With the majority of witnesses relying upon the word of others who had access to clocks, it becomes increasingly difficult to even establish the necessary timetable.

In addition to the difficulty in establishing the timetable, it becomes very clear that there is the very real challenge of inconsistent testimony. This challenge is magnified even more by the simple fact that, in legal proceedings, certain parties are deliberately attempting to hide facts from the historical record. This is not a new challenge to historians. By necessity we act as judges of the facts in testimony. However, in this case, we must act as the judges of the judged. We are presented with testimony that varies dramatically: I know nothing about the theft of any guns or I discussed the theft of guns with a certain individual; I never had any problem with Baker, or I witnessed a argument between Baker and Miller and Wise; Parkison was drunk, or Parkinson was not drunk. All of these arguments must be weighed when developing an analysis, interpretation, and narrative describing and explaining the events surrounding the death of Roy Baker.

These issues make the analysis of the Roy Baker case particularly challenging. However, they point to vital aspects of historical analysis that must be dealt with. Therefore, the exercise of deciphering, organizing, and interpreting the case of Roy Baker acts as an excellent case study in the historical method.

I have posted comments on Rick's Site and Audrey's Site

Post # 4

Interpreting History Through The Trial
Reading

Murder in Tombstone: The Forgotten Trial of Wyatt Earp by Steven Lubet

Over the past week I have been confronted with the trial of interpreting history through the trial on a number of occasions. In this weeks reading Murder in Tombstone by Steven Lubet and a reading for my research seminar, He Shall Go Out Free: The Lives of Denmark Vesey by Douglas Egerton, the specific challenges that a historian faces when analyzing history through a trial deliberation have become very evident to me. It is vital that these challenges are analyzed from a historiographical standpoint.

In He Shall Go Out Free, the historian is presented with a much more daunting challenge than Lubet was faced with. Egerton analyzed the life of Denmark Vesey and the circumstances surrounding the uprising that he was executed for conspiring. The historian is confronted with a clear lack of documentation when looking at the life of Denmark Vesey’s. Furthermore, when looking at the events surrounding the suspected uprising in 1822, the historian if forced to rely almost entirely upon the court records. In this case it proves to be particularly troublesome given the fact that the suspects in this case are free blacks and slaves living in Charleston, South Carolina. One must ask the question, can you rely upon testimonies that were likely coerced under harsh circumstances by a master class? Though this problem does not apply directly to this weeks reading, it does raise questions concerning the interpretation of courtroom testimony in history. How can a historian use an obviously and intentionally biased source?

In Murder in Tombstone, Lubet does a respectable job of analyzing the trial and events surrounding the infamous gunfight at the O.K. Corral. Though Lubet is not confronted with the same challenge as Egerton, as he has a number of sources outside of the trail deliberations themselves, his work does cause one to stop and think about the challenges of using courtroom testimony in historical analysis. Lubet writes, “In fact, a trial (or in this case, and extended hearing) is a contest of ideas in which each side tries to present a comprehensive reconstruction of past events, combining facts and law in a way that leads to a logical result.” (Lubet 189). Given this statement, how must a historian proceed with his or her analysis? If a trial is contest in which the defense and the prosecution are trying to present a “reconstruction of past event” that is logically feasible, a few issues with these sources arise. First, legal deliberations are not only filled with the natural biases that historical sources are inevitably influenced by. By this definition, a historian is analyzing information that is by its nature intended to present a biased argument. A second issue that must be dealt with is that of contradicting testimonies. This is not an uncommon issue for a historian to deal with. However, in a trial, the presence of contradicting accounts is intensified.

I believe that Lubet handles these challenges very appropriately and provides the historian with useful reminders of tools with which to analyze history through the lens of a trial. First, it is very important that Lubet utilizes other sources that are available to him. These sources include a number of print media sources (reports from the Tombstone Epitaph and the Tombstone Nugget) and other personal accounts. Secondly, using these sources, Lubet does an excellent job of providing the political and social context within which the gunfight and the trial took place. This contextual understanding is vital in identifying potential biases and inconsistencies that emerge in courtroom testimony. Finally, Lubet does a very good job of breaking down the trial testimony. The reader gets a sense of the overall argument that both the defense and prosecution are making, however, he is careful to analyze the individual testimonies. In other words, he does not get lost in the story that the lawyers are attempting to weave together, he analyses every strand of testimony.

The historiographical trials of analyzing trials have been challenging me over the past week. Furthermore, with the discussion on the Roy Baker affair coming in the next few weeks, I believe that it is very important to step back and look at how the historian should handle his or her analysis of legal deliberations. These challenges are not new to the historian; however, they are intensified when one is analyzing the intentionally biased information presented in a trial. In Murder in Tombstone, Steven Lubet provides an excellent example of some of the steps that a historian must take in his or her analysis.