A Comment on 19th Century American Historiography

By a combination of ability and good fortune all the remaining obstacles, by no means contemptible were swept away, the will of the two nations was executed; and before long it was generally realized that their union was expedient, logical, and practically inevitable. For a variety of reasons, however-chiefly natural prejudices and equally natural want of information and the fact that certain gifted opponents of annexation enjoyed great prestige in quarters where much attention has been paid to historical writing-some inaccurate views regarding the matter have unavoidably prevailed. (Justin H. Smith. The Annexation of Texas. 469)

How much of what we study as American History was shaped by the New England historians of the mid to late nineteenth century? How much of that bias still affects us today? I am writing of the gentleman historians of Boston and New York, those writers with the time to write history as they saw it, at their leisure, historians who predate Henry Adams. Justin Smith wrote this nearly a century ago. He dedicated his work to George Garrison, another early professional historian. The work of Smith demonstrates definitely the influence of Ranke in his obsession with the original materials and his documentation of the same. Here, in the concluding sentences of his massive The Annexation of Texas, Smith is taking a swipe at his predecessors by claiming that they allowed sectional prejudice to color their writings. We can see in this work the transition from the amateur historian to the professional. How successful was Smith? To write anything about this event, his work cannot be ignored.

The 1844 Sales Pitch for Annexation

At this point let us halt for a moment, and let us recall the three general ways in which Texas has been found a menace to the United States. Had she remained independent and acquired northern Mexico, including California, she would have been a serious rival and probably the cause of numerous complications. Had she remained independent and fallen in line with the designs of England, as apparently she almost certainly would have done, she would not only have exerted in these directions all the power she herself possessed, but would have been supported and guided by a great nation that had aims believed to be inconsistent with the prosperous development of the United States. While, had the project of annexation been definitely rejected by the votes of the North, she would have perhaps caused the dismemberment of the American Union and the formation of a new confederacy, including herself, the southern States and a large portion of Mexico, that might not only have rivalled but have overshadowed the wreck of the old republic. (Justin Smith. The Annexation of Texas. (220))