Athena Syriatou ‘Cold War, Cold War Culture and History in Schools in Britain, 1945-1989’ Abstract East-West polarization is a theme that has preceded and survived the Cold War in history teaching in Britain. Despite of the call of educationalists of the late forties for a ‘campaign of education for peace’ through history teaching no real change occurred until the mid eighties. The contrast between a democratic West with a despotic East enjoyed an enviable longevity and appeared also in the modern textbooks of the late sixties. However the development of the New History as well as the state intervention in the curriculum redefined the purposes of history teaching. Eventually the new textbooks produced complied with a more pluralistic view of Britain making redundant, by and large, EastWest polarization in history education. History teaching in schools is a reliable indicator of domestic values, perceptions of identity and the political assumptions of most societies. The period of the Cold War, a period of political, social and cultural transformation, for most western European countries, is reflected both in the intentions of educationalists in history teaching and in history textbooks for schools. This is true not only in countries where teaching materials and teaching methods were accurately designed by state educational authorities, but also in more liberal educational systems. Britain is famous for having a free market of school textbooks throughout its educational history. As regards textbooks, it has never succumbed to any state intervention such as recommendation committees, which are found in most parts of the world, let alone the approval of one appropriate textbook per level of education as it is the case in many others. This was the case even after the historical intervention in the curriculum at the beginning of the nineties when the National Curriculum was established. However, restrictions were indeed present. These might have been the result of largely social and economic circumstances, which were determining the number of textbooks to be found in the school library. They might also have been the result of a particular educational trend that was not prescriptive, yet, was strongly 1 Athena Syriatou influencing the content of history teaching. Thus, although there was no uniform ideology nationwide, some uniformity did exist at least among schools of equal economic means. Some uniformity also came as a result of the examination curricula of the Examination Boards, which were covering a variety of subjects as well as levels of academic performance.1 Turning to history teaching to illuminate our cultural understanding of the Cold War one can find oneself amidst a multitude of chronological disparities and inaccuracies. It is not easy to study the intentions of the educationalists. This is because, it is difficult to determine how the textbooks were used because they were written in one era and taught in another. This paper examines a variety of history textbooks that were used in secondary schools from 1945 and until the end of the Cold War. It concentrates not only on the special section on the Cold War- which could be found usually in textbooks after 1960s-but also, on the cultural and political division of East/West as interpreted in many textbooks written before 1939. It also refers to the educational trends in history teaching, in order to contextualise the actual content of history textbooks. Special attention is given to the first period after the end of the Second World War where some attempts of educationalists aiming at the creation of universal citizenship via history teaching, faded because of renewed patriotic fervour stemming from Cold War tensions. The ‘orientalistic’ reading of history preceded and followed the Cold War at least in the sense that Edward Said in his famous analysis has shown. A set of historical generalizations which presented the West’s enemies as the Other included not only 1 Many sociologists discussing the famous theories of Bourdieu on the reproduction of ‘the dominant culture’ through education claim that this can be acchieved both in centralised and decentralised systems of education. R. Harker emphasises that ‘Power and control are likely to be exercised less directly, utilising contagious fields, and hidden a much more opaque mask of ideology and rhetoric. Control, however, may be equally sustained’ see R. Harker, An Introduction to the Work of Pierre Bourdieu, Basinstoke, 1990, p.88. The issue of uniformity of the curriculum, despite the lack of central state directives, was also discussed in several circumstances amogst British educationalists. Very characteristic are the words of the historian and educationalist Margaret Bryant at some early attempts to plan a centralised history curriculum. At the History Syllabus Conference held on January 1967, she stated ‘…No-one in this country would advocate a prescribed course and yet there is a great deal of uniformity. Pressures from tradition – our own school-days, courses at older universities, the whole apparatus of textbooks and examination syllabuses which we have inherited, all tend to produce uniformity.’ See M. Bryant, report of History Syllabus Conference held on the 6th of January 1967 at the College of Preceptors and in the Swedenborg Hall, p.10. 2 Athena Syriatou Asia and the Middle East, but also Russia which was depicted in the main as permanent danger and threat for the West.2 These ideas were dominant only with a few exceptions until the mid eighties despite of the fact that changes in the outlook of the books had been appearing since the sixties. However, changes in content occurred not only as a result of end of the Cold War but mainly as a result of the changes in history writing for schools. This was the period when a wider discussion on the purposes of history teaching was sparked off by the establishment of a National Curriculum during the late eighties. The first period immediately after the Second World War was a period of reconstruction and austerity. This of course affected all aspects of British life and not only education. However, what it meant for the publishing world and particularly for textbooks was that no new books could be published especially as there was paper rationing until 19493. This is was true even in the most well endowed schools they were used for a much longer time - right up to the early sixties. Yet the need for textbook revision and enrichment was profound in many cases in the educational world. No new textbooks were produced at this period, as a result of the cries of the educationalists of the late forties who envisioned a universal history which would lead to world citizenship. On the contrary the ideological polarization of the Cold War suited the whiggish ideas of older textbook generations, which now were found in a new context. As a matter of fact real innovation in the textbooks did not appear until the mid sixties when the country had undergone social and ideological transformations and the old educational values had been depreciated. Older textbooks new animosity If we are to examine history textbooks used in the fifties it is necessary to turn to the older generation of books, often written in the beginning of the century, in order to detect not of course the representations of the contemporary events of the Cold War, but a few of the older perceptions of the east and west as historical concepts. After all it was mainly on these perceptions and beliefs that the whole conflict of the Cold War was constructed in the subsequent publications for schools. The hidden morality of 2 3 E. W. Said, Orientalism, (London: Penguin, 2003), pp.24-27. J. Feather, A History of British Publishing, (London 1988), pp.215-218. 3 Athena Syriatou what constituted the values of east and west, in these older generations of books, were used to depict the priorities of the two camps at war in the books published during the last years of the fifties and sixties. The distinction of east west was not geographical anymore but strongly political. Thus books used in the nineteen forties and fifties which were written in the first decades of the century were not far from the nineteenth century ideas where history was supposed to convey “beautiful lessons of morality”, as a reviewer a century before noted.4 In that context ideas such as liberty and democracy are identified with the West while ideas about despotism and autocracy are identified with the East. Eventually and after several transformations these ideals will be attributed to the two protagonists of the Cold War, the United States of America and Russia, and will be presented as their innate features which are responsible for the rivalry not only between two political systems but also between two value systems, finally between virtue and evil. A.J Grant, the writer of the textbook Outlines of European History, a book initially written in 1918 but reprinted and re-edited several times until the late-fifties informs us that: As Athens has been called the most ‘western’ of the cities of Europe, so its hardly a paradox that the United States of America are the most ‘European’ part of the earth’s surface.5 As a matter of fact, what Grant attributes to the United States of America, are those features of classical Athens which represent political freedom, and democratic government. Furthermore he does not hesitate to make clear that America’s cultural origins are European. The transfer of this culture of political freedom came with the English settlers who were themselves the agents of liberty, claims Grant. In a very popular book written initially in 1911 and reprinted and re-edited until 1964, the English tendency to create self-governing communities and thus contribute to the ‘art of governing’ was particularly emphasized.6 4 Quarterly Journal of Education (1831), p.200, quoted in Valerie Chancellor, History for their Masters, Opinion in the English History Textbook: 1800-1914, (New York: Augustus M. Kelly,1970), p.9. 5 A.J.Grant, Outlines of European History, (London:58), p.vii. 6 G.T.Warner, C.H.Marten, D.Muir, The Groundwork of British History, (London and Glosgow: Blackie& Son Limited, 1943), p.962. 4 Athena Syriatou In doing so the writers were mostly echoing the ideas of nineteenth century writers and politicians who saw the expansion of England in America as an opportunity to establish the English spirit in an empty part of the world.7 In that frame the assemblies of people in Virginia in 1619 were not formally instituted but grew up from themselves, because it was ‘the nature of Englishman to assemble’ as Seeley famously noted in his Expansion of England. So did the politician Charles Dilke in his book Greater Britain who saw in America: ‘an amplifier for England’s voice to the world, offering to the English race ‘the moral dictatorship of the globe, by ruling mankind through Saxon institutions and the English tongue’.8 Furthermore, in these textbooks revolutions were usually condemned as un-English and alien to the nation’s character. In this vein most revolutions which occurred in Europe – the French one not being an exception9- were condemned as evil and unnecessary. Not the American Revolution though. This one occurred, according to these textbook writers only because: ‘the colonists were Englishmen with an Englishman’s idea of liberty and selfgovernment. They established American Independence on the basis of English history’10 Religion was another matter that equipped the West, England and the USA, with political freedom. According to the authors of many books it was mostly Protestant Christianity that was compatible with rational thinking, incorruptible ethos and purity of thought, while the Catholic Church was presented as highly corrupted and the Eastern Orthodox one, in the rare occasions mentioned it was despotic. How was Russia depicted in these books? Russia, was not popular with the authors. This was not because of the Revolution of the early twentieth century but had its origins much before that. The image of Russia in European histories was one of barbarianism and backwardness. 7 J.R.Seeley, Expansion of England, Lecture III ‘The Empire’, (London: Macmillan and Co.,Limited, 1931, 1895) pp.55-57. 8 A comment on cultural imperialism made by R.L Schuyler, on Charles Dilke’s travel book Greater Britain, in R.L Schuyler, The Fall of the Old Colonial System, A Study in British Free Trade, (London 1945), pp.250-251. 9 According to G.T.Warner, C.H.Marten, D.Muir, the French Revolution could have been avoided had the King been willing to make reforms. France fell when Napoleon became a despot and ceased to preach liberty. ‘It was the compensation of fate’ according to Wellington and according to the writers which saw in this another moral lesson of liberal Britain op.cit., p.701. 10 G.T.Warner et alia, o.c., p.631. 5 Athena Syriatou Although Peter the Great was the czar to introduce Russia to ‘the rudiments of European civilization’ he was also according to Denis Richards, the writer of the popular book, Modern History 1789-1945, ‘a brutal intelligent ruffian, whose intention of foreign policy was to expand in the west’. 11 It was emphasized that despite being underdeveloped in terms of political institutions and social stratification, Russia had expansionist claims to parts of Western Europe and the Balkan countries, at least since the time of Peter the Great. These claims had nothing to do with the expansionist policy of Britain, which in most books, was treated as a civilizing mission which would introduce the colonized countries into true civilization especially political civilization. On the contrary, had Russia been successful in her endeavors, this would mean that the conquered countries would turn to political instability and authoritarianism. It was in the same vein that most Russian history was narrated. Catherine the Great might have had a correspondence with Voltaire, but that did not mean that she was less dangerous for her own people and the rest of Europe since she too followed an expansionist foreign policy abroad and an oppressive government in the interior.12 The reforms introduced by Alexander I were presented as weak attempts towards some modernization, which nevertheless failed because of the inherent authoritarianism of the czar and the nature of Russian institutions such as the nobles and the clergy which could only produce authoritarianism. ‘Drunkenness and corruption were everywhere prevalent and nothing was done to discourage them’ claimed Richards. The new army system of military colonies, although it started with the benevolent idea of settling soldiers on the land, ended up with the enslaving of local populations.13 A codification of the law was no more successful, especially as the Czar turn down the offer of Jeremy Bentham to undertake the codification without payment on condition that he should have a free hand. The promised Russian constitution was never realized and the only actual moves towards progress were only the foundation of some schools and three universities, a great public library, an increase in religious liberty, and a few details such as abolition of flogging as a punishment for parish priests. Alexander’s policies were according to Richards a half 11 D. Richards, Modern History 1789-1945, (London: Longmans, 1938 first edition,1959), pp.212-213. This book enjoyed a wide popularity with seven editions and numerous new impressions from 1938 when it was first published until 1985. 12 Ibid, p.213. 13 Ibid, p.218. 6 Athena Syriatou hearted liberalism in domestic affairs which turn to downright reaction in international affairs.14 The Czars that followed were the same. The emphasis was on the bleak side of life in Russia. The pre-Revolutionary Russia of the first years of the twentieth century were described with great sympathy of the author for the revolutionaries, yet the communist revolution of 1917 was mentioned incidentally as a side effect of the czar’s successive mistakes and the people's perpetual misery. Russia appeared again when Richards lists the dictatorships of the world. He concludes that even with the new communist regime, ‘looking for democracy in Russia would seem to be rather like looking for a needle in a whole collection of haystacks’15 Richards writing in the end of the thirties could be considered to be one of these historians who were not attached to the idea of progress not even to the idea of national superiority, as writers of the previous generation used to be. Like many historians writing for schools he was trying to ‘build blocks of democracy’ through history textbooks - a phrase that appeared in a recent book History and National Life16 In his political history Richards was striving to give a lesson about democracy which, to his mind, was better served by the western Anglo-Saxon countries. He was trying to teach this idea without giving a lesson in nationalistic history. He was not always positive about England and other Protestant Western European states and he could admit that they too had faults, and he did sympathize with the Russian revolutionaries. Yet as it regards the survival of liberty the Anglo-Saxon countries were ahead of others. Certainly they were ahead of countries such as Russia which had an inherent tendency for autocracy and subjection. Richards' model historians were his contemporaries H.A.L.Fisher and of course G.O. Trevelyan who although both of them were of a higher caliber, they too presumed Britain to be a superior political state in their analysis and used it as their central point of reference. These two generations of textbooks although written in the first years of the century and in the late thirties, were suitable for the most part of the fifties and early sixties. One can claim that the whiggish patriotic spirit which was prevalent in the first generation of twentieth century textbooks fitted a society which lived for a few years in the afterglow of a world victory, envisaging itself as a chosen country. The 14 Ibid, p.219. Ibid, p.344. 16 P. Mandler, History and National Life, (London: Profile Books, 2002), p. 79. 15 7 Athena Syriatou great ideals, the role of character and the civilising destiny of the British nation, matched the feeling of pupils and teachers immediately after the Second World War. Books written in the light of the First World War, such as Richards book, remained in use well into the mid-sixties, when the Cold War was a strong feature in determining intellectual and social culture after the First World War. The decline of nationalistic history and Cold War By the mid-sixties the academic historical scene was radically transformed. It was completely different from the writing of the first half of the twentieth century. The advance of sociology and social anthropology much enhanced the tendency to cease exalting one’s country and concentrating instead, on what was wrong with it. Although these disciplines by acquiring status came to threaten history in the school curriculum, one could not doubt their tremendous benefit for a new look at history.17 In the academic world from the last years of the fifties the ‘Marxist-LiberalRadical’ school of historiography was in full sway in Britain.18 By the late sixties and seventies, this school already included leftist historians in the older universities and 17 During the first years of the sixties several new theories and approaches to history flourished. In 1962 the Institute of Education published a bulky volume entitled Handbook for History Teachers, containing the wide spectrum of extremist points of view as well as the compromising tendencies. Both the ‘method and matter’ of history were equally suspect for the wrongs of education and a vast new scholarship at all levels of the history teaching profession flourished to alter that. W.H. Burston suggested a kind of history that would use the traditional methods, enriched by the disciplines of economics, sociology or anthropology, but not presenting overgeneralisations and iron laws true for all historical circumstances. See W.H Burston ‘The Syllabus in Secondary Schools’, in W.H. Burston, C. Green (eds.), Handbook for History Teachers, (London: 1962). Present-centred history, world affairs, twentieth century history and history integrated with other disciplines were the rivals of traditional history from the mid sixties to the late seventies. Until the midseventies world history and contemporary history were gradually infiltrating both secondary schools and examination syllabuses. For a discussion of the new trends in history teaching for secondary schools during the sixties and seventies see unpublished Ph.D Athena Syriatou, Educational Policy and Educational Content, The Teaching of European History in Secondary Schools in England and Wales, 1945-1975, University College London, 1997, chapter IV, pp.107-114. 18 To mention but two characteristic examples of the new historical books which made a mark of new historical trends: C. Hill, Intellectual Origins of English Revolution, (Oxford:Oxford University Press, 1965), E. Hobsbawm, The Age of Revolution, (London:Weidenfeld & Nicolson Ltd, 1962). 8 Athena Syriatou readers in the wider educated public.19 More specialist subjects were appearing and radical points of view were becoming established.20 The widening of popular literacy too produced a new public who enjoyed participating in historical arguments and following the dismantling of the views they had been taught at school.21 In this context then, it is worth turning to schoolbooks to see how radically different they dared to become in this new age. We should also bear in mind that during the late fifties and sixties ‘twentieth century history’ as well as ‘world history’ became gradually and steadily the most popular subject in the examination syllabuses. This was because modern and contemporary history could accommodate in a certain extent the new sciences as well as those changes occurring in the late twentieth century everyday life- even if this was only in a few chapters at the end of the book. So what was the treatment of the Cold War in these books now that the textbook writers we dedicating special chapters on it? The Cold War more than any other theme, was central to the historical interpretation of many books in the sixties. In Strong’s book The Story of Twentieth Century, a book written initially in the mid-sixties for lower forms, a chapter on ‘The United States and the Democratic West’ was to be contrasted with a chapter ‘Soviet Russia and the Communist East’ The American regime was analysed as a democratic parliamentary one, and so America became the agent of democracy in Europe. The United States was for the wrecked post-war Europe the agents of wealth and security. In this context, the Marshall Plan and the establishment of the North Atlantic Treaty confirmed America’s role as the friend of Europeans, while at the same time this role was constantly contrasted with the moves of the enemy, Communist Russia.22 The reasons that communism means danger and autocracy and the United States democracy, freedom and prosperity were analysed in a previous book of Strong for 19 P. Kennedy, ‘The Decline of Nationalistic History in the West, 1900-1970’, Journal of Contemporary History, Vol.8 January 1973, pp.92-100. 20 The pamphlets issued by the Historical Association were very characteristic in introducing new radical ideas on specific historical subjects which had been taught in a traditional way. These pamphlets aimed to foster original opinions on history as a result of new research. 21 The popularity of A.J.P. Taylor, an academic historian who made many television appearances in the seventies is an example of the interest of the public in scholarly matters and an indication of a wide literacy. 22 C.F. Strong The Story of Twentieth Century, (London: 1966), pp.103-116. 9 Athena Syriatou upper grades, The Twentieth Century and the Contemporary World, a book initially written in 1956 and re-edited during the next decade. “As the nineteenth century has been called “Britain’s century”, so the twentieth has been called the “American century”, he claimed. This is because America enjoys an expanding economy, whereas Britain still struggles to maintain its economic stability in a competitive world. The writer argues that the present situation of all three Britain, America and Russia is a consequence of the Industrial Revolution but in a different sense. The industrial revolution helped Britain rise in supremacy during the nineteenth century, while emigration to America helped America to use its enormous wealth. However, in Russia, which in the early phases of its industrialisation was unlucky enough to experience a social revolution not in the sense that Marx has envisaged, things went wrong. But ironically enough all this revolution instead of changing history only seemed to perpetuate the bonds of the Russian peoples. While this [revolution] made the Russian break with the past all the more complete, it is nevertheless true that Soviet Russia has inherited from Czarist Russia both the habit of an authoritarian regime and an imperialising policy. Soviet imperial ideas now take the form of offering to the rest of the post war world a Communist panacea for all social ills from which it suffers. The United States, with its long tradition of free enterprise, is naturally opposed to such an ideology, and offers in its place help to those who may thereby resist the Communist virus.23 In another popular book of the sixties, which combined academic history with a modern outlook with photographs and timelines, statistics and questions for the examinations, content was not far different. In Snellgrove’s The Modern World Since 1945, more concentration on Russia’s evils was on the agenda. The Revolution of 1917 was described as sudden event with much ferocity but the causes were not properly analysed. The rapid industrialisation, which followed the Revolution, was a period of immense hardship and misfortune for the Russian peoples but no mention was made of how these changes contributed to the modernisation of Russian’s economy. The Cold War of course offered itself as the perfect example to describe Soviet Russia as the ultimate enemy. Russia ‘swallowed’ land and people in Snellgrove’s expression while Stalin’s policy towards his opponents gave even greater 23 C.F.Strong, The Twentieth Century and the Contemporary World, (London: University of London Press, 1967), p.242. 10 Athena Syriatou opportunity to reinforce this picture terror. ‘An Hungarian ruler, reports Snellgrove, dealt with his opponents, one by one, cutting them like slices of salami’.24 Snellgrove dared to speak about darker sides of the USA, but he did that very carefully. Thus Senator McCarthy was dishonest and betrayed an otherwise sound justice system that after all had all the right reasons to be suspicious of communist danger.25 Racist behaviour did exist but the President of USA was against it, although not always able to make the right decisions. Nixon and his untiring Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, travelled the world to bring peace and most famously to stop the war in Vietnam. Unfortunately the Watergate scandal broke. This was the fault of traitors in the government.26 As for the on going dictatorships and democracies of the world, Snellgrove offered a straightforward historical interpretation for the differences between Latin America and North America. ‘North America was democratic because Protestant Anglo-Saxons initially settled it, while Latin America had dictatorships because the first settlers were Catholics with an inherent tendency towards autocracy’.27 However, this was not the whole picture of history textbooks during the Cold War. A very popular book such as Jack Watson’s Success in 20th Century World Affairs, initially published in 1974, dared to be different. The American society he described was that of the McCarthyte witch-hunt and of great social disparity between rich and poor. He identified the grave discrimination against black Americans and the reluctance of the American political establishment to pursue welfare schemes. He showed American foreign policy as aggressive.28 Watson reversed the traditional celebration of the ‘Democratic West’. Watson’s west was democratic, but not necessarily for everyone. It was independent, but not always respecting the independence of others. It was pacifist but that would not exclude aggressive foreign policy, especially when there was a need for the ‘restoration of democratic institutions’29 24 L.E.Snellgrove, The Modern World Since 1945, (London: Longman, 1968), pp. 208-209. 25 Ibid, pp.289-290. 26 Ibid, pp.291-300. 27 Ibid, p.303. 28 J. Watson’s Success in 20th Century World Affairs, (London: John Murray, 1974), pp.193-201. 29 Ibid. 11 Athena Syriatou So, what were the dominant views of history textbooks for the last phase of the Cold War, that is, during the eighties when there seemed to be a new wind in the crisis between East and West? The most decisive factor of what seemed to be determining the teaching of history was neither the actual events of the Cold War nor the ideological intentions of the of politicians; although for the first time, under the premiership of Mrs. Thatcher, the intention of the government to intervene in history teaching was expressed The most determining factors were the changes in the educational world, which were actually developing a new ideology in the education of history. The New History and the Cold War Already since the seventies the Schools Council’s project had suggested and managed to incorporate new ideas about 'New History', as this project became known, into examination qualification at GCE O level as well as CSE. This project became very popular amongst the teachers of history and eventually strongly influenced mainstream history for schools.30 It introduced the pupils to the relativity of notions such as truth, selection of subjects and moral judgements; it even advocated empathic reconstruction of the past. Most important it stressed that history was essentially a methodology and that school history was a medium rather than an end for education.31 In practice this meant that instead of statement on given historical truths pupils were encouraged to question historical facts and historical interpretations.32 However these views had been attacked in the late seventies and early eighties by the new right who had a different view of what the role of history should be in schools. Educationalists from the right argued for returning to the content of history rather than the method.33 They thought this content should be concentrating on 30 I. Lewis, ‘Conflicting Values In The Debate Over School History’, unpublished M.A. University of London, Institute of Education, (London: 1990), pp.35-70. 31 Ibid, p.63. 32 R. Phillips, History Teaching, Nationhood and the State, A Study in Educational Politics, (London: Cassell, 1998) pp.15-16. 33 Along with the pedagogical values of School’s Council project, what was really contested were the social values of the time which carried strong political beliefs That history along with other humanities was the culprit for the alleged economic decline of Britain, because it had not invested properly in technological education, was the dominant view of politicians about education during the late seventies. History at school was on the defensive once more, at the same time as the practical implementation of the ‘New History’ promoted by the SC project, and failed in the classroom. See A.Syriatou, op.cit., pp.113-114. 12 Athena Syriatou nationalistic history. Yet they knew then, more than ever before in Britain, that history content had to reconcile world history with national history for a multicultural society.34 What did that mean for the history textbook production during the eighties? In very many ways the focus on method put a lot of content ills right. The outlook of textbooks already suggested a different more vivid approach to history. There were not only photographs, maps, cartoons and statistics, besides the main narrative, but also capsules which contained sources that an historian might use. Speaking particularly about the Cold War - extracts from magazines, reporting for example the ‘The five days of freedom’ on 12 November 1956 in Hungary. There were also extracts from John Le Carre’s novel The Spy who Came from the Cold, to describe the Berlin wall and extracts from speeches of politicians.35 A list of ‘heroes’ as told by the Vietcong to South Vietnamese villagers during the war, was to show that heroes were in the eye of the beholder. There were interviews with soldiers who fought in Vietnam and Korea, which described their experience not only as heroic but also as miserable and dreadful. Grave changes did appear though in the main narrative of books. The most important change was that rather than stating events they were skeptical about them. The following extract is characteristic in showing this change in attitude. The writer here is ironic when speaking about the notion of fear on which dominated the Cold War. We read: ‘It is tempting to believe that since the Russians were unlikely to start a war against an America armed with the bomb, their strategy would instead stir up revolutions in other countries and crises around the world. It followed that the world must somehow be protected against the political poison of ‘international communism’ - a kind of witch’s brew, distilled in Moscow and smuggled abroad to corrode and finally to destroy ‘free societies’. And further down: ‘Such a view of a world in peril from Russian menace was not altogether accurate. Stalin certainly intended to hang on to what he held in Eastern Europe; but he had no plans to 34 I. Lewis, op. cit., p.88. See N. Kelly R.Rees, The Modern World, (London: Heinemann Secondary History Project, 1997), pp.62-95, J.Scott, The World Since 1914, (London: Heinemann History, 1989), pp.80-93, P. Shutter, T.Lewis, Skills in History, Book 3 The Twentieth Century, (London: Heinneman Educational Books, 1988), p.196. Dereck Heater, Our World This Century, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1982), p.135, Dereck Heater, Our World Today, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985). 35 13 Athena Syriatou encourage Communists in France or in Italy, or even in China, to seize power.’ 36 Of course, one might argue, this writer had history on his side because he knew writing in 1981 that things could not go the way some writers in the sixties and seventies thought that they might be going. Yet what I think is an important change was the introduction of empathy of the historical elements in the text. The writer explains that American fears were justified up to a certain point but there was no an ideological mission behind these fears that aimed to save the world. They were not the result of the de facto political superiority of the West. On the contrary he becomes very realistic when explaining major benevolent gestures of the Americans towards Europe, such as the Marshall plan, which in the books of the mid-fifties were treated as sacred. Thus the Marshall plan was ‘generous’ yet the writer makes clear that the terms under which it was signed was the agreement that ‘the countries which received aid would be expected to buy American goods and to provide investment opportunities for American capital.’37 The Cuba crisis also offers an example of changing approaches to a well-known event. While in many books in the past Fidel Castro was a communist who rebelled against a capitalist government, (occasionally he rebelled against a corrupted dictator), it was considered that he disturbed law and order. In a textbook written in 1988 we read the story slightly different. The introduction on the chapter ‘The Cuban missile crisis 1962’ starts by stating the reasons that Americans were involved in saving Cuba from communism. We read: ‘In 1898 the USA helped the Cubans to overthrow Spanish rule, and as a result became deeply involved in Cuban affairs. The Americans built a naval base at Guantanamo, and invested heavily in the Cuban economy. They controlled 90% of the cattle ranches and 40% of the sugar industry.’38 The writer thus again shows the interests of Americans in Cuba and not their desire to restore democracy after a communist leader took power. The examples can cover all phases of the Cold War which were now narrated in a way that pupils were introduced to the complexity of international relations. In a book for lower forms we get a chapter that proposes a balance of arguments. It proposes arguments for and 36 T. Howarth, Twentieth century History, The World Since 1900, (London: Longman, 1981), p.224. 37 Ibid, p.225. 38 P. Shutter, T. Lewis, op.cit. p.196. 14 Athena Syriatou against communism and for and against capitalism and asks pupils to make their own decision of how the world should be governed.39 The fundamental difference of these books from the previous generation was that they were encouraging the pupils to see the different points of view and empowering them to make a decision about what to believe. This change is strongly political, one might argue, because it shows a relaxation of polarized perceptions of the world and a confidence of democratic institutions. Indeed many would argue that during a period in which government decided to intervene in the curriculum and even suggest the return to a nationalistic history in schools, what in reality happened was the widening of a discussion about what history should be and how it should be taught.40 The production of these books is mostly a result of this discussion rather than a governmental policy. After all, operating in a free market means that not all books written during the eighties were championing these ideas. It is quite difficult to measure the exact numerical popularity of these new books, yet it is also sure that parallel to them history textbooks written in a biased manner did exist, many written after the establishment of the National Curriculum and the end of the Cold War. What can one finally say on the teaching of the Cold War in Britain during the Cold War? The first period of post-war Britain the Cold War was not taught as a different subject. The pacifistic cries of some educationalists could not find a fertile ground due to major economic difficulties. During that period the older generation of books used in schools provided an interpretive scheme where a liberal and democratic West was contrasted with a despotic East. All that young pupils had to do was to replace in their minds 'the bear devouring her neighbors' as Russia was often represented in textbooks, with Soviet Russia.41 The period of the sixties and the seventies although a period of social permissiveness in Britain and challenging of the establishment did not produce immediately a new kind of textbooks in terms of content despite the modern outlook that most new books adopted. Change did occur in the eighties mostly as a result of a widening of the interest in history teaching as well as a result of the coming of age of what was once called New History. This was supported, of course, by the 39 D. Heater (1985), op.cit., pp.57-60. 41 See D. Richards op.cit., cartoon from Punch, p.188. 15 Athena Syriatou professional integrity of the writers. However, it has always been a credit of the educational system that choice within a free market of textbooks - rather than centralized directives which came from a ministry of education - has been essential in history teaching, despite of the fact that this also meant a constant battle with cliches, polarization, biases and single-mindedness. BIBLIOGRAPHY D.R. Bark, D.R. Gress From Shadow to Substance, 1941-1963, (Oxford, 1989). H.F. Bing, ‘The Study & Teaching of History in Post War Germany’, History, Feb & June 1951. W.H. Burston, C. Green (eds.), Handbook for History Teachers, (London: 1962). V. Chancellor, History for their Masters, Opinion in the English History Textbook: 1800-1914, (New York: Augustus M. Kelly, 1970). J. Feather, A History of British Publishing, (London: Longmans,1988). A.J.Grant, Outlines of European History, (London: 1958). R. Harker, An Introduction to the Work of Pierre Bourdieu, (Basinstoke, 1990). D. Heater, Our World this Century, (Oxford: OUP, 1982). D. Heater, Our World Today, (Oxford: OUP, 1985). T. Howarth, Twentieth century History, The World Since 1900, Longman, London, 1981. N. Kelly, R. Rees, The Modern World, (London: Heinemann, 1996). P. Kennedy, ‘The Decline of Nationalistic History in the West, 1900-1970’, Journal of Contemporary History, 8 (1973). I. Lewis, ‘Conflicting Values In The Debate Over School History’, unpublished M.A. University of London, Institute of Education, (London, 1990). P. Mandler, History and National Life, (London: Profile Books, 2002). V. Ogilvie, ‘Teaching Without Nationalistic Bias’, Times Educational Supplement, 7 July 1947. R. Phillips, History Teaching, Nationhood and the State, A Study in Educational Politics, (London: Cassell, 1998). D. Richards, Modern Europe 1789-1945, (London: Longmans, 1959). E. W. Said, Orientalism, (London: Penguin, 2003). R.L Schuyler, The Fall of the Old Colonial System, A Study in British Free Trade, (London: 1945). 16 Athena Syriatou J.Scott, The World Since 1914, (London: Heinemann History, 1989). J.R.Seeley, Expansion of England, (London:Macmillan and Co., Limited, 1931). P. Shutter, T. Lewis, Skills in History, Book 3 The Twentieth Century, (London:Heinneman Educational Books, 1988). L.E.Snellgrove, The Modern World Since 1945, (London: Longman, 1968). C.F. Strong The Story of Twentieth Century, (London: 1966). C.F.Strong, The Twentieth Century and the Contemporary World, (London:University of London Press, 1967). A. Syriatou, Educational Policy and Educational Content: The Teaching of European History in Secondary Schools in England and Wales, 1945-1975 unpublished Ph.D. University College London, 1997. G.M. Trevelyan, ‘Bias in History’, History, March 1947. G.T.Warner, C.H.Marten, D.Muir, The New Groundwork of British History, (London: Blackie & Son Ltd, 1948). Jack Watson, Success in 20th Century World Affairs, (London: John Murray, 1974). Other Sources International Committee, ‘Bilateral Revision of Textbooks’, leaflet circulated to the meeting of the Council of the Historical Association, 3 March, 1951. Letter to the President of the Historical Association from the chairman of the International Committee, March 1946. Letter from Georg Eckert to the Historical Association, 30 August 1949. M. Bryant, report of History Syllabus Conference held on the 6th of January 1967. Memorandum to the Council of the Historical Association March 1,1946. Minutes of the Historical Association, May 1949. Minutes of the Historical Association, October 1950, discussion of International Committee. Minutes of the Historical Association, November, 1951. Report of the Joint Commission of the London International Assembly and the Council for Education in World Citizenship Education and the United Nations, p.52. Report of the Second Anglo-German Conference of History Teachers, Brunswick, July 1950: ‘The First Results’, History, October 1950. 17 Athena Syriatou UNESCO, A Handbook for the Improvement of Textbooks and Teaching Materials as Aids to International Understanding, 1947. UNESCO Looking at the world through Textbooks, 1946. 18