Question 1: What does monument mean? How do monuments "make us more stupid"?
Question 2: How does Lincoln's birthplace meet America's ideological needs?
Question 3: What is the implication of the statement "Lincoln freed the slaves"?
Question 4: How do the images on monuments reinforce white supremacy?
Question 5: What was actually new about what Columbus did? Why did Adam Nordwall discover Italy?
Question 6: Why is the accusation of being "presentist" a mistaken idea?
Question 7: What happened to the monument to the Haymarket riots? What does Loewen suggest we do with monuments like this?
Question 8: What is the controversy at Fort Pillow? How does this site erase the African American story in the Civil War?
Question 9: Should the Park Service at Mt. Rushmore mention that the sculptor was a member of the KKK or that the government's ownership of the land the monument sits on is disputed by the Dakota tribe? Why or why not?
Many people think that historical archaeology is good way to address the problems presented in Monumental Myths, because it is a more democratic method for understanding the past than history. Please explain why this is the case and what resources historical archaeologists use to produce and interpret the past in a democratic way.
Reference:
Monumental Myths by Tom Trinley