I , as a Tongan/New Zealander, would LOVE to hear the history of the Pacific Nations ( Melanesian, Micronesian and Polynesian history). Pretty please John??
the story is always told by men of letters, usually those that survive are of the victors people; but there are many cases where the lettered men are survivors of the loosing side.
Hold the phone... You're the same John Green who wrote "The Fault in Our Stars" and you're also doing this?! You sir have escalated up the respect ladder.
"Is our inability to escape our biases a good excuse for not even trying?" No, we must never give up. We must acknowledge our biases whenever we find them and keep trying to see the story from the other point of view. By studying who we were, history can help us better understand who we are. Studying who they were can also help us better understand who they are.
+Polyglotstop The statement is not necessarily racist. Crash Course World History has 42 videos, which cover 12000 years of human history and every major civilisation which has ever made a big difference to the world, plus other very large things which have made an enormous effect on the entire world today, such as religion and trade. It is not unreasonable to point out how the technologically primitive nature of the aboriginals, as well as their relative isolation from the rest of history, makes them unworthy to talk about in the same fairly small series which covers the agricultural revolution, the roman empire and the colonisation of the new world, amongst other extraordinarily influential things.
Yayyy!!! You mentioned Australia and New Zealand! You have satisfied our respective nations' self-worth. It was the pick-me-up that we all needed today so thank you sir.
As someone who has lived most of their life in Hawaii I can't describe how awesome it is to hear John tell this story. This is a story I've heard in school, at home, everywhere basically, so it feels so wonderful to hear such a familiar story from a person like John Green.
Not just being "PC" here, I think a video about Australian Aborigines would be fascinating. There is definitely enough historical information about Aboriginal culture to fill up an 8 minute video (half of John's videos are filler anyway) because Australian and Aboriginal cultures coexisted for a hundred years or so, and there is a plethora of oral tradition which is being proven right by archaeological excavations (for example, there are accurate drawings of megafauna which have been found dating to something like 30kya). Aboriginal land management practices have also recently been examined as a sort of midway point between agriculture and nomadism, as they used fire to change entire landscapes while maintaining ecological balance. It really changes the traditional idea of pre-agricultural humans as just hands-off wanderers and fractures the whole dichotomy of "civilised" and "uncivilised" itself.
Ni Clouds It's awesome to find someone with the same passion for these discoveries as I do! Can you recommend any good books or other material on the subject?
Although Captain Cook ventured into the Pacific for the first time in 1768, I think it should be mentioned that the Polynesian people (made up of the pacific Islanders, Hawaiians, Easter Islanders and Maori (NZ natives) should have a mention or even have its own crash course as its own history is fascinating. Polynesian people are known to have ventured into the pacific realm before Christ (BC) - descending from Asia and eventually arriving at South America (and some say North America of the Coast of California) using only star navigation. New Zealand itself was occupied by the Polynesian Islanders approximately around 300-1200AD (this point is being argued but it is around this time). It would be awesome if Crash Course would delve into this untapped topic as there is not much mention or recognition for this culture globally.
Jason Gerrard Well, number one you are setting up a false dichotomy. More than one civilization can discover and Island. Number 2 and most importantly, Captain Cook's discovery is exponentially more consequential to the world we live in, today. Less importantly, these videos are about History where we have written records as opposed to, pre-history where we don't have written records.
Mark Stuber You give credit to the true discovers. True Cook was an explorer and discoverer of lands, but Polynesians ventured out into the Pacific before Europeans even knew how to ocean travel. I can tell by your German name you probably don't even know nothing about Polynesian history and saying Captain Cooks discovery is more important just goes to show how uninformed you are.
*Gets excited when John mentions New Zealand* *cries when he continues to just say Australia* CCWH should have a special on NZ history, it's the most unique of the colonies since the British didn't treat the Maori anywhere as horribly as they treated the aboriginals and native Americans, and pretty much the only time a large majority of Maori died by the hands of the British was during the NZ civil war between the British and the Maori
Many of the enigmas John cannot resolve would be illuminated by examining James Cook's journals of his contact with Maori and other Polynesian peoples. Cook was an eighteenth century naval officer with all the limitations of world view this implies to a contemporary person. However, taking Cook's world view as an undiluted enlightenment intellectual's is as condescending of him as John condemns in other historian's attitudes toward the Hawaiians. Cook makes a number of humane and shrewd observations in his journals and certainly didn't fall into the "noble savage" trap of his contemporaries.
+ Aviel Geronimo, in Hawai'i they definitely don't teach that. They teach that Cook died during an attempt to get back a stolen life boat (and the fracas that resulted in a scuffle along the black beach in Kealakekua Bay), and he was killed in Kealakekua (where a memorial today still stands---possibly not on the exact spot), he was stripped of flesh common ancient Hawaiian practice (also documented on other native chieftains) because it enables them to "gain the mana" of that chief, and or that's it's a common practice of respect among high noble blood. They then hide the bones after cleaning it. That's actually a sign of respect. Despite the shit bag ways of many Europeans navigators and colonizers (who often pay hospitality of the natives with violence) in the Pacific, eg Magellan, these so called "savages" actually have a lot respect. I grew up on the Big Island and been to Kealakekua (which a town uphill is named after Captain Cook aka Capt Cook, HI) and the Captain Cook memorial many times. If anyone's is visiting the Big Island definitely a nice place to snorkel.
+LinguaPhiliax: Mind citing some evidence for your claim? Here's evidence for my claim that Cook was a decent person, written by someone who actually sailed with him (named David Samwell): "[Cook was] of a disposition the most friendly, benevolent and humane."
The episode you are talking about only showed a few years of Russia and gave only a few examples and mostly consisted of jokes and stories about monarchs. It would be like explaining the story of Italy in 7 minutes and mostly talking about individuals who did some funny things in their life.
Jurij Fedorov You are right, but they kinda did that to most countries. You could make a whole crashcourse about pretty much any country if you want to go really deep into its history
I thought they did a great job on many countries: USA, England, The Roman Empire, France, China, Persia, Ottoman, Indians. There were a lot of good videos. The Russian episode was really narrow and weak. Better than nothing but still not a lot.
i heard that when he came back it caused a lot of c9nfusion with the hawaians. before Cook and his crew played along with the initial belief they were associated with Lono (not actually lono) but when they came back the hawaiians were understandably pissed and confused. in the "pissed and confused" period (which included the king being kidnapped) one of Cook's men panicked and shot a child, resulting in the melee which killed cook and forced his crew to flee the island. when the europeans returned they returned Cook's remains, things got smoothed over and Hawaii became a popular port for Europeans in the Pacific.
really appreciate how you guys have begun incorporating open-ended questions at the end of each video. it aids in the further thinking, incites curiosity and displays the rationality of crash course's team of writers and producers. bravo!
Ι have one major complaint to make about this series... You know... like... vikings? Nothing? Seriously? Like they didn't contribute in any way to world history...
I'm a Hawaiian and we sure we're smart. We didn't let a British colonize Hawaii. We had our own king and made our own Hawaiian constitution. When captain cook brought his weapons our king wanted their weapons for war and uniting the islands. Us Hawaiian we can learn fast about reading and languages. In the late 1800s hawaii was the top readers and education until U.S.A overthrown hawaii. When will man kind know imperialism is wrong.
I hope that English is your second language because while you claim to be smart, your grammatical errors suggest otherwise. Not that I would judge a culture by an individual, just represent yourself better if you are going to make broad sweeping generalizations and statements about that to defend an entire culture
John Doe That's true. And since the Hawaiian islands are a part of the United States, "English" would seem to be maluhia808's first language. And like seriously dude, you should know better than to ask a question and punctuate it with a period.
First off Cook didn't OWN shit in the islands. Our people were there long before he came along. & he didn't teach us science. We are natural born navigators and warriors. We used the stars as a map as well as everything else that was around us. We didn't steal from him either it's called trading. Traditionally in the pacific islands culture when you visit a foreign land you bring offerings & we give back In return. It's called respect.
I really appreciate the fact that you cover different views and interpretations of historic events. Thank you for helping me to broaden my perspective.
1:40 You still have to do: -Ned Kelly -Mawson -The Stolen generation and the decimation of the Aboriginal life style -The Mouri and Aboriginal Resistance -How/Why Australians celebrate their worst loss Galipoli MORE AUS!
Wow! My class loved your video. We find it interesting that there are always two or more sides to a story. From Mr Guiso and 4/5G from Pittsworth State School Australia.
I loved this episode and found it really thought provoking, but there is just one thing that bothers me about this whole thig, and that is the fact that we struggle so hard to understand the deaths of Europeans in the colonies when what's most terrible is actually the natives' death. It'd just make sense that a native would want to kill some one who attacked their people!
Aloha (Hi) everyone. I live in Hawai'i and would like to comment that the Hawaiians obviously killed Cook because of a conflict that he wasn't prepared for. It's hard to say what the primary reason was. Hawaiians stealing, Cook disrespecting the buildings and people or some unknown cultural misunderstanding could have been the primary reason. But whatever it was he was probably not prepared because of the season. During the season of Lono it is forbidden to go to war. Also him showing up on a ship with a big white (sail) symbol of Lono probably made the first encounter much more civil. When he came back it was during the season of Ku, the god of war. So, Cook probably didn't change the way he conducted himself. The Hawaiians would have treated everyone different depending on the season. Cook probably didn't know that the politeness was only seasonal and that later people expected to go to war. So, Cook acted culturally very appropriate (initial arrival) and then very inappropriate (returning during season of WAR). I'm not sure if any Hawaiians thought he was Lono or just a representative. Old Hawaiian culture thought of gods, volcanoes and powerful people as being kind of similar in that they all have spiritual power known as Mana. It's like the ideas of qi, ki, or prana. Anyone or anything could have Mana and the important thing is how righteous (socially appropriate) the thing/person is. So, a Hawaiian saying "That's Lono" is not as big of a jump as a European saying "That's Jesus". They definitely thought he was important because you don't try to eat and absorb the Mana of just anyone. Yea, we ate him. Probably. Maybe. But Hawaiians weren't normally cannibals. Just if your name is "Cook".
Not true Sarah Kelly the most expensive horse show in the Southern Hemisphere is in New Zealand and crash course you need to give some more info about New Zealand
Captain Cook is pretty much the only part of Australian history that people all around the world know/care about. What about federation! Or even the fact that the allies would have definitively lost WW1 and WW2 if it wasn't for the Australians and New Zealanders. And what about the fact that Americans and Britons choose to overlook our involvement in the wars as footnote even though we struck Hitler his first fatal blow in the desert and he never won another battle!!! We Australians and New Zealanders (I'm both) have shaped the world more than anyone else gives us credit for!!! I want to see at least one Crash Course video on the real history of Australasia. Also with a focus on Maori and Aboriginal heritage.
You are pre-supposing that the only way that native people may have mistaken white people for gods would be if they were somehow dumber then white people... that in itself is a superior attitude. Are you suggesting that they took their own beliefs and religious systems as seriously (not) as white people did? it would be a ridiculous notion for a european of that era to mistake man for god because of their culture. a 'native' culture would have an equal amount of influence on native people, meaning that YES they did genuinly believe in their own gods and YES it is entirely probable that a mistake was made on more then a few occaisions. reference Australian 'Wadjina' and catholic priests... both have a prominent white collar around their neck, this led to some aboriginal people believing (at first anyhow) that the wadjina spirits had come. don't disregard, disrespect or underestimate the power of a people's beliefs.
The reason that I enjoy Crash Course History is that you present the information, the questions left unanswered and provide multiple interpretations. This gives me the impression that you attempt to at least provide an educational series without an agenda. I thank you for this and as long as these videos are online I know myself and others will refer back to them to educate ourselves on history.
At a young age I was taught that the Samoan word for Europeans was: Palagi. In some cultures like the Maori their representative word reflects how they see the world. Maori by the way means normal (or so I was taught). So anyone not Maori was by this meaning as "not normal". Back to Palagi. Which I can't spell with this keyboard cause the first A in Pa should have a bar above the letter A. The closest I can get is Pà which means explosion or break. "Uh Pà'a le mea" that thing is broken/exploded. Lagi the second half the word means Heaven. Or the close approximation to it. The first sittings were of clouds drifting in from the horizon (the sails) to the peoples of little island a vessel that to them was larger then life (because any ship bigger than what they could build were large ships were none existent). So the arrival would have been celebrated cause fair skinned peoples bringing new things were viewed as tidings of good fortune. BUT them returning limping and battered and seeking refuge would be a show of weakness. The Hawaiians probably sought to take what they viewed as easy pickings. Just my two cents.
In Hawaii the word Maoli means real as in "not a ghost" because during Hawaii's first census families were including deceased relatives a household members, this was a problem for many censuses/(censi?) around the world because the world view was different back then
He talked as much about his life as Zheng He or Mansa Musa, but I think his demise covered a lot about what kind of person he was perceived as in life.
well, what exactly did happen during that 50k years and how much of it can be shown by well sourced historical records? The show has gone pretty far out of its way to lay that down as ground rule during past episodes, e.g. the one about Mali and the african kingdoms... if we do not have much proper material to go by it doesn*t get an episode of its own. All the more if the happenings do not have much of a worldwide perspective so they would fit into the CCWH moniker of the series. Especially since he jumps over practically all of inner european history because it only led to one king, prince or duke having a bit more land to get wealthy from instead of another one... wars and big funny hats do not truly make you important to the whole of history and JG kind of thrives of going to spots where that is different and bigger perspectives wait to be observed. Polynesia and its cultures are fascinating, sure. But they are pretty isolated and "introverted" for most of these 50.000 years. Compare to China that undoubtedly had a giant impact on the world and its history... 99% of chinese history was gone through in a 30 second segment of "oh yeah, these are the dynasties / periods of it" and those 30 seconds also included a mongoltage...
Moses Huf-Tirfe It's hard to make a video about that. You can't always tell broad stories and history. Mostly esoteric things about culture and beliefs. Or things that might have happened.
you didnt talk about australia you mentioned it you didnt give any real history like cook didnt discover aus and about the relationship bewtween soldier convict and land owners and he aboriginal peoples
Just caught up on all of the crash course videos (not all in one day, of course). I absolutely LOVE thought bubble graphics!! Bravo for the neat and humorous artwork. Also bravo to you John (and Raoul Meyer) for writing and making the show so entertaining and educational.
Absolutely love the in-depth analysis of validity of sources, inherent problems with Hawaiian sources due to European-contamination, and whether that should be a deterrent on proposing such arguments. Awesome job, Mr. Green!
This guy's just being politically correct. The Europeans had ships, cannons and cloths so yeah they were more advanced and more intelligent. The truth hurts and the truth is Europeans had better technology and we're more intelligent and Europe spread it's technology all over the world, as a result most people on this planet dress, live and run their government like Europeans. Europeans did some bad things, but they also did a lot of good, our entire planet runs on things that were built and invented by Europeans, so it's pretty funny to see non Europeans complain.
I would rather not be killed than have my children have technology. That is like murdering your mother to give you medicine and cellphones but still live in poverty. They were find hundreds of years without technology despite dying earlier in life from child birth and diseases.
John! I think I’m going to take those last three questions with me into a lot of the issues I’m trying to really think critically about right now. THANK YOU FOR THOSE!
One things to be said is that Cook was a very compassionate person when he started his first voyage however he eventually became desensitised in his later voyages. A good example of this is how in his early voyages he ate what his men did in order to prevent scurvy however in one of his later voyages he forced his men to eat (either seal or walrus) as their food supply was in danger
He sent a letter to the king sayin ive come to a land down under where women glow and men plunder you better run better hide do you hear the thunder lol RULE BRITTANIA
Also forget that fact that Cook did not know how to swim, despite spending most of his life at sea; which is why he did not swim to the longboat with the others, remaining on the shore.
pumpSHO The Hawaiians were not cannibals per se, it was however apart of ritual to consume parts of an enemy or greatly venerated person once they were dead. They did not kill Cook with that purpose in mind, it is questionable if they were meaning to kill him at all. His crew attacked the village in retaliation, also seeking his remains. The frightened natives it is said, presented Cook's second in command with a newly cleaned skull, some flesh they suspected was human, and some bones of what would have been a very tall man (Cook was 6'2"); along with some clothes and belongs identified as belonging to the dead Commodore. The Hawaiians kept parts of Cook for iconic cultural practices, as they considered him to be legendary. The parts surrendered to his crew were given an honourary sea burial. His heart was probably eaten, and his flesh boiled of the bones like the medieval saints. Dismembered body parts carried around in a ceremony. So not eaten in entirety, but probably in some part, as a sign of respect in their culture.
Matthew Laurence yes that would be an European point of view, the flesh that the Hawaiians gave back to the English were his buttocks as a sign of contempt, the confusion if him being eaten is because he was "cooked" (lol cook was cooked) so his bones could be taken as trophies, which is common in Hawaii
pumpSHO Yes, that does seem a visible explanation, though they highly viewed him as someone of greatness, and islanders where asking European sailors about Cook decades after his death. We were not expressly taught that he was eaten, but it is a common knowledge thing here. Not saying your wrong. After all, I am in no authority to do so, as I know so little of Hawaiian culture.
When you look at certain racist, imperial justifications like ''The White Man's Burden'', among other work, and quotes from European imperialists, you can't help but wonder how some of them thought of themselves as a special ''race'' destined to conquer and civilize other people (of ''color'') when their ancestors were uncivilized, and tribal themselves until the Romans came and conquered. But even then, they refused to be assimilated, and stayed tribal throughout the remainder of the empire. Some of them were truly delusional based on their racism, but others knew exactly what they were doing when they used skin color and their culture of ''civility'' as an excuse to conquer and set up imperialism.
1) Only historians and the church had access to records the Romans did not like other Europeans. It is not like their were still Roman written records all over Europe that did not decompose in forests 2)Spreading information took access to a printing press, hand written records, or person to person word of mouth all of which required people to go vast distances across Europe physically to either transport paper or a story telling person. which would be extremely expensive and only nations, world corporations, and the catholic church could afford at that time. 3)Plus only the rich traders, preists, craftsmen, kings, and government officials were literate because the poor had little schooling because it was all had to pay for private schools since few places had free education until the Industrial Revolution which made having an educated workers class profitable. 4)All groups that could have spread the information had the incentive to do the opposite
Brooke Charteris maybe they were talking about cook himself exploring? What times in the video did you see Maori? But Hawaiian and Maori are the most similar of each other compared to other Polynesian languages, not like that's on topic
I just saw an image pop up as they were explaining cook's encounter with hawaiians, It came up around 6:00 minutes into the video. Watching it again though they have put a little comment box in there saying that they weren't hawaiian though. I can't remember if that was there when I commented originally. If so, i just didn't see it. (sorry.)
Anyone involved in studying these historical events would have the sense to judge them from the perspective of the times in which they happened and not with a cheesy grin & an inappropriate sense of smugness as they waffle contemporary politically tinged retrospectives that are an attempt to belittle these historical figures, (only if they are Caucasian of course). Anyone from any culture who had embarked on world travel (in other words whoever had been an early circumnavigater would have encountered the same problems and mis understandings as did Cook - who until his final voyage had conducted himself admirably and respected the dignity of everyone he met -thus he was respected then by all & is the man we know of today.
Captain Cook was a great man. He lived an interesting life and died an interesting death. His crew's documented first encounters with isolated populations are fascinating to read.
My grandmother's second husband was an explorer, and spent a few years as president of the Explorer's Club in NYC. Lowell Thomas was a friend of his, and sent him a small hand carved boat along with a note. It stated the boat had been carved by a crew member from a branch of a tree under which Cook died. There is writing on the boat with a date. The boat was supposed to go to the Peabody Museum but he died shortly after and my grandmother gave me the boat. I need to get some imaging done of the writing on the boat and the note that came with it for proof as it is getting hard to read.
I would encourage anyone interested in the debates over Cook's death to go to the sources. Green gives a very distorted summary of the positions, especially of Sahlins who he grossly misrepresents. Sahlins' analysis is built from a very detailed and informed understanding of Polynesian religion and philosophy as well as the historical record. He does not present the death of Cook simply as a ritual killing, among several crude misrepresentations of his argument in this video. The debate is fascinating and important. It deserves better treatment than this.
Bit of a random question - I just started studying primary school teaching. What age group do you think students would really be able to understand and comprehend this? I am thinking of using it for an assessment to teach year 3/4. Is it appropriate?
As an Australian I can tell you I was never taught the "mistaken for a god" explanation for his death. Instead we were taught the "he was a bit of a dick to natives" explanation to his death. I don't know if that is the same for all Aussies but it was certainly part of official ciriculum when I was a kid.
so there is a video mentioning about haitians, chinese, americans,japanese, koreans and russians... where is the video mentioning about South east asians??
You have yet to talk about Antarctica. Checkmate, crash course.
+Dominic Sosa Cool suggestion! I guess that would really be an ice breaker.
+Dominic Sosa but no human has been native to Antarctica
***** well i'm the higher race and i'm offended when people call me human look around you aliens are real look at me
.
***** Hmm i'm not smart but i can tell i did better then that if it were a test the st has spoken
***** i know i have bad grammar.
New Zealand! You mentioned us!
This is the most famous we've ever been.
Sarah Kelly right hahahahaha
Right!
Ishmam Masud - Cuz I Can oof true dat
I , as a Tongan/New Zealander, would LOVE to hear the history of the Pacific Nations ( Melanesian, Micronesian and Polynesian history). Pretty please John??
"Until the Story of the hunt is told by the Lion, the tale of the hunt will always glorify the hunter." - African Proverb
What does that mean?
+Erika Söderlund history always writed by the winner
the story is always told by men of letters, usually those that survive are of the victors people; but there are many cases where the lettered men are survivors of the loosing side.
That is a really nice proverb, Do you know from where exact part of Africa comes from?
Ahmed Zaghloul I've heard it attributed to Chinua Achebe, an Igbo author from Nigeria
so when did he encounter Peter Pan?
That was Cook not Hook.
Eric Taylor No fucking shit :)
Probably when he went to Neverland... AKA when he died
Fluffy Winter
D:
when he fell into a microwave...
No, you did NOT become an official world history class this episode! YOU CANNOT DISCRIMINATE AGAINST ANTARCTICA.
MarioFan756 lol.
Hahahha
No one lives their permanently
tumb up if your doing a marathon of all episodes
dangit
dangit
rubikfan1 dangit
Where did he sail?
Nerd
"We finally noticed you Australia!"
[me, sipping a room temperature beer in my underwear]
hey yeah. cheers
Hold the phone... You're the same John Green who wrote "The Fault in Our Stars" and you're also doing this?! You sir have escalated up the respect ladder.
how are people still just now finding this out!? it's not anything new! @_@
John Green: *exists*
Me: Respect 1,000,000,000,000,000,000
"Is our inability to escape our biases a good excuse for not even trying?" No, we must never give up. We must acknowledge our biases whenever we find them and keep trying to see the story from the other point of view. By studying who we were, history can help us better understand who we are. Studying who they were can also help us better understand who they are.
By overcoming the limitations of our perspective we overcome the Human Condition. A noble task, to say the least.
Would be cool if there was a Crash Course on Australian Aboriginals.
agreed
Australian Aboriginals were primitive people so there would be nothing really to talk about.
Lol. Now is it racist? They didn't even have metal. *****
+Polyglotstop The statement is not necessarily racist. Crash Course World History has 42 videos, which cover 12000 years of human history and every major civilisation which has ever made a big difference to the world, plus other very large things which have made an enormous effect on the entire world today, such as religion and trade. It is not unreasonable to point out how the technologically primitive nature of the aboriginals, as well as their relative isolation from the rest of history, makes them unworthy to talk about in the same fairly small series which covers the agricultural revolution, the roman empire and the colonisation of the new world, amongst other extraordinarily influential things.
+Justin Walsh crash course on the maori's
Yayyy!!!
You mentioned Australia and New Zealand!
You have satisfied our respective nations' self-worth. It was the pick-me-up that we all needed today so thank you sir.
As someone who has lived most of their life in Hawaii I can't describe how awesome it is to hear John tell this story. This is a story I've heard in school, at home, everywhere basically, so it feels so wonderful to hear such a familiar story from a person like John Green.
Not just being "PC" here, I think a video about Australian Aborigines would be fascinating. There is definitely enough historical information about Aboriginal culture to fill up an 8 minute video (half of John's videos are filler anyway) because Australian and Aboriginal cultures coexisted for a hundred years or so, and there is a plethora of oral tradition which is being proven right by archaeological excavations (for example, there are accurate drawings of megafauna which have been found dating to something like 30kya).
Aboriginal land management practices have also recently been examined as a sort of midway point between agriculture and nomadism, as they used fire to change entire landscapes while maintaining ecological balance. It really changes the traditional idea of pre-agricultural humans as just hands-off wanderers and fractures the whole dichotomy of "civilised" and "uncivilised" itself.
Well, Aboriginal culture and peoples WERE Australians for thousands of years.
No body cares
Ni Clouds
It's awesome to find someone with the same passion for these discoveries as I do! Can you recommend any good books or other material on the subject?
All they invented was a boomerang in their 10,000 year history
That isn't true, it's just a pointlessly incendiary statement.
Although Captain Cook ventured into the Pacific for the first time in 1768, I think it should be mentioned that the Polynesian people (made up of the pacific Islanders, Hawaiians, Easter Islanders and Maori (NZ natives) should have a mention or even have its own crash course as its own history is fascinating. Polynesian people are known to have ventured into the pacific realm before Christ (BC) - descending from Asia and eventually arriving at South America (and some say North America of the Coast of California) using only star navigation. New Zealand itself was occupied by the Polynesian Islanders approximately around 300-1200AD (this point is being argued but it is around this time). It would be awesome if Crash Course would delve into this untapped topic as there is not much mention or recognition for this culture globally.
You're confusing pre-history with history.
Mark Stuber That must be why he has an ancient Egypt video.
Why mention Captain Cook if the true discoverers of New Zealand are the Polynesians???
Jason Gerrard
Well, number one you are setting up a false dichotomy. More than one civilization can discover and Island.
Number 2 and most importantly, Captain Cook's discovery is exponentially more consequential to the world we live in, today.
Less importantly, these videos are about History where we have written records as opposed to, pre-history where we don't have written records.
Mark Stuber You give credit to the true discovers. True Cook was an explorer and discoverer of lands, but Polynesians ventured out into the Pacific before Europeans even knew how to ocean travel.
I can tell by your German name you probably don't even know nothing about Polynesian history and saying Captain Cooks discovery is more important just goes to show how uninformed you are.
*Gets excited when John mentions New Zealand*
*cries when he continues to just say Australia*
CCWH should have a special on NZ history, it's the most unique of the colonies since the British didn't treat the Maori anywhere as horribly as they treated the aboriginals and native Americans, and pretty much the only time a large majority of Maori died by the hands of the British was during the NZ civil war between the British and the Maori
Many of the enigmas John cannot resolve would be illuminated by examining James Cook's journals of his contact with Maori and other Polynesian peoples. Cook was an eighteenth century naval officer with all the limitations of world view this implies to a contemporary person. However, taking Cook's world view as an undiluted enlightenment intellectual's is as condescending of him as John condemns in other historian's attitudes toward the Hawaiians. Cook makes a number of humane and shrewd observations in his journals and certainly didn't fall into the "noble savage" trap of his contemporaries.
DO CANADA!!!
or just do a longer episode about the English Empire
william arnold British*
Yeah the maroi wars
At the end of his videos, he always sounds like he's about to laugh.
+ Aviel Geronimo, in Hawai'i they definitely don't teach that. They teach that Cook died during an attempt to get back a stolen life boat (and the fracas that resulted in a scuffle along the black beach in Kealakekua Bay), and he was killed in Kealakekua (where a memorial today still stands---possibly not on the exact spot), he was stripped of flesh common ancient Hawaiian practice (also documented on other native chieftains) because it enables them to "gain the mana" of that chief, and or that's it's a common practice of respect among high noble blood. They then hide the bones after cleaning it. That's actually a sign of respect. Despite the shit bag ways of many Europeans navigators and colonizers (who often pay hospitality of the natives with violence) in the Pacific, eg Magellan, these so called "savages" actually have a lot respect. I grew up on the Big Island and been to Kealakekua (which a town uphill is named after Captain Cook aka Capt Cook, HI) and the Captain Cook memorial many times. If anyone's is visiting the Big Island definitely a nice place to snorkel.
Captain cook chased a chook all around Australia, he lost his pants in the middle of France and found them in Tasmania!
that not very nice
Lmfao really ???
Funny
Neither was Cook. Why should you care?
+LinguaPhiliax: Mind citing some evidence for your claim? Here's evidence for my claim that Cook was a decent person, written by someone who actually sailed with him (named David Samwell): "[Cook was] of a disposition the most friendly, benevolent and humane."
Did you just say JIF, Mr. JREEN?! - just kidding ;)
JIF, just like how the actual creator of the format calls it.
I want a whole Crash Course just on Russia.
I'm almost positive, that there is an episode on Russia
The episode you are talking about only showed a few years of Russia and gave only a few examples and mostly consisted of jokes and stories about monarchs. It would be like explaining the story of Italy in 7 minutes and mostly talking about individuals who did some funny things in their life.
Jurij Fedorov You are right, but they kinda did that to most countries. You could make a whole crashcourse about pretty much any country if you want to go really deep into its history
I thought they did a great job on many countries: USA, England, The Roman Empire, France, China, Persia, Ottoman, Indians. There were a lot of good videos. The Russian episode was really narrow and weak. Better than nothing but still not a lot.
Well, I disagree, but I respect your opinion, brother
I just figured out you wrote the fault in our stars...... good book, good movie.
i heard that when he came back it caused a lot of c9nfusion with the hawaians. before Cook and his crew played along with the initial belief they were associated with Lono (not actually lono) but when they came back the hawaiians were understandably pissed and confused.
in the "pissed and confused" period (which included the king being kidnapped) one of Cook's men panicked and shot a child, resulting in the melee which killed cook and forced his crew to flee the island.
when the europeans returned they returned Cook's remains, things got smoothed over and Hawaii became a popular port for Europeans in the Pacific.
really appreciate how you guys have begun incorporating open-ended questions at the end of each video. it aids in the further thinking, incites curiosity and displays the rationality of crash course's team of writers and producers. bravo!
Ι have one major complaint to make about this series... You know... like... vikings? Nothing? Seriously? Like they didn't contribute in any way to world history...
I'm a Hawaiian and we sure we're smart. We didn't let a British colonize Hawaii. We had our own king and made our own Hawaiian constitution. When captain cook brought his weapons our king wanted their weapons for war and uniting the islands. Us Hawaiian we can learn fast about reading and languages. In the late 1800s hawaii was the top readers and education until U.S.A overthrown hawaii. When will man kind know imperialism is wrong.
He did say that you were smart. He was the one who said that you were very smart.
I hope that English is your second language because while you claim to be smart, your grammatical errors suggest otherwise. Not that I would judge a culture by an individual, just represent yourself better if you are going to make broad sweeping generalizations and statements about that to defend an entire culture
John Doe That's true. And since the Hawaiian islands are a part of the United States, "English" would seem to be maluhia808's first language. And like seriously dude, you should know better than to ask a question and punctuate it with a period.
Roshaun Robinson Lmao
What? It's true! First graders know better.
First off Cook didn't OWN shit in the islands. Our people were there long before he came along. & he didn't teach us science. We are natural born navigators and warriors. We used the stars as a map as well as everything else that was around us. We didn't steal from him either it's called trading. Traditionally in the pacific islands culture when you visit a foreign land you bring offerings & we give back In return. It's called respect.
I really appreciate the fact that you cover different views and interpretations of historic events. Thank you for helping me to broaden my perspective.
1:40
You still have to do:
-Ned Kelly
-Mawson
-The Stolen generation and the decimation of the Aboriginal life style
-The Mouri and Aboriginal Resistance
-How/Why Australians celebrate their worst loss Galipoli
MORE AUS!
Wow! My class loved your video. We find it interesting that there are always two or more sides to a story. From Mr Guiso and 4/5G from Pittsworth State School Australia.
OH MY GOSH Not enough pacific island history!!!!! PLEASE DO MORE! It's crazy awesome!
These videos are pretty cool, good for a refresher.
Is the irony of his laptop sticker on purpose?
I loved this episode and found it really thought provoking, but there is just one thing that bothers me about this whole thig, and that is the fact that we struggle so hard to understand the deaths of Europeans in the colonies when what's most terrible is actually the natives' death. It'd just make sense that a native would want to kill some one who attacked their people!
Aloha (Hi) everyone. I live in Hawai'i and would like to comment that the Hawaiians obviously killed Cook because of a conflict that he wasn't prepared for. It's hard to say what the primary reason was. Hawaiians stealing, Cook disrespecting the buildings and people or some unknown cultural misunderstanding could have been the primary reason. But whatever it was he was probably not prepared because of the season. During the season of Lono it is forbidden to go to war. Also him showing up on a ship with a big white (sail) symbol of Lono probably made the first encounter much more civil. When he came back it was during the season of Ku, the god of war. So, Cook probably didn't change the way he conducted himself. The Hawaiians would have treated everyone different depending on the season. Cook probably didn't know that the politeness was only seasonal and that later people expected to go to war. So, Cook acted culturally very appropriate (initial arrival) and then very inappropriate (returning during season of WAR). I'm not sure if any Hawaiians thought he was Lono or just a representative. Old Hawaiian culture thought of gods, volcanoes and powerful people as being kind of similar in that they all have spiritual power known as Mana. It's like the ideas of qi, ki, or prana. Anyone or anything could have Mana and the important thing is how righteous (socially appropriate) the thing/person is. So, a Hawaiian saying "That's Lono" is not as big of a jump as a European saying "That's Jesus". They definitely thought he was important because you don't try to eat and absorb the Mana of just anyone. Yea, we ate him. Probably. Maybe. But Hawaiians weren't normally cannibals. Just if your name is "Cook".
Did you just say Hawaiians are smart because they live on an island, and didn't have STDs? Really?
As an Australian I thank you and you must talk about us more
IT'S GIF NOT JIF
It's pronounced jig though
Umaesh Kumaran I hate you
+smilly456 Yeah its actually pronounced Jif...
+Toni Capone that's what I meant to say
+smilly456 graphical interchange format not Jraphical
Not true Sarah Kelly the most expensive horse show in the Southern Hemisphere is in New Zealand and crash course you need to give some more info about New Zealand
Captain Cook is pretty much the only part of Australian history that people all around the world know/care about. What about federation! Or even the fact that the allies would have definitively lost WW1 and WW2 if it wasn't for the Australians and New Zealanders. And what about the fact that Americans and Britons choose to overlook our involvement in the wars as footnote even though we struck Hitler his first fatal blow in the desert and he never won another battle!!! We Australians and New Zealanders (I'm both) have shaped the world more than anyone else gives us credit for!!! I want to see at least one Crash Course video on the real history of Australasia. Also with a focus on Maori and Aboriginal heritage.
Is Australia a country?
+drz I hope that was a joke.
+drz its both a country and a continent
+jamie pittington it is also an island!
+Maddenedgeek ohh right
You are pre-supposing that the only way that native people may have mistaken white people for gods would be if they were somehow dumber then white people... that in itself is a superior attitude. Are you suggesting that they took their own beliefs and religious systems as seriously (not) as white people did? it would be a ridiculous notion for a european of that era to mistake man for god because of their culture. a 'native' culture would have an equal amount of influence on native people, meaning that YES they did genuinly believe in their own gods and YES it is entirely probable that a mistake was made on more then a few occaisions. reference Australian 'Wadjina' and catholic priests... both have a prominent white collar around their neck, this led to some aboriginal people believing (at first anyhow) that the wadjina spirits had come. don't disregard, disrespect or underestimate the power of a people's beliefs.
Here in Hawaii, Cook's arrival has been seen as the worst event that happened to Hawaiian people.
+Takashi Murayama I'm not surprised.
I think it was the worst event for Captain Cook; you bastards murdered him.
@@OilBaron100 that's good
I live where he was from and he is praised by the people here 😂
How would they still have a king after the Ritual Killing of the king on a yearly basis? Would they just pick some random dude out of the island?
"Ritual killing" doesn't mean actual murder. It's a religious ritual, where nobody dies.
***** Thank You
Donnie McWhorter as a polynesian (Cook Islands) our culture is confusing at the best of times so it pays not to think too deeply into it
***** just like those Aztecs and their countless ritual killings...
The reason that I enjoy Crash Course History is that you present the information, the questions left unanswered and provide multiple interpretations. This gives me the impression that you attempt to at least provide an educational series without an agenda. I thank you for this and as long as these videos are online I know myself and others will refer back to them to educate ourselves on history.
You mentioned New Zealand/ Aotearoa but didn't mention that the impact on Māori was similar to the aboriginal peoples of Australia...?
"Half-devil and half-child, 'cos in retrospect that seems to describe......you" - John Green. YOU HILARIOUS, OCCASIONAL AUTHOR YOU!!! small mic drop
"The White Mans Burden", the earliest example of Poe's Law.
At a young age I was taught that the Samoan word for Europeans was: Palagi. In some cultures like the Maori their representative word reflects how they see the world. Maori by the way means normal (or so I was taught). So anyone not Maori was by this meaning as "not normal". Back to Palagi. Which I can't spell with this keyboard cause the first A in Pa should have a bar above the letter A. The closest I can get is Pà which means explosion or break. "Uh Pà'a le mea" that thing is broken/exploded. Lagi the second half the word means Heaven. Or the close approximation to it. The first sittings were of clouds drifting in from the horizon (the sails) to the peoples of little island a vessel that to them was larger then life (because any ship bigger than what they could build were large ships were none existent). So the arrival would have been celebrated cause fair skinned peoples bringing new things were viewed as tidings of good fortune. BUT them returning limping and battered and seeking refuge would be a show of weakness. The Hawaiians probably sought to take what they viewed as easy pickings. Just my two cents.
In Hawaii the word Maoli means real as in "not a ghost" because during Hawaii's first census families were including deceased relatives a household members, this was a problem for many censuses/(censi?) around the world because the world view was different back then
He talked as much about his life as Zheng He or Mansa Musa, but I think his demise covered a lot about what kind of person he was perceived as in life.
What if he was killed because he introduced gonorrhea and the Hawaiians were not happy about that?
why would they hate whites for gonorrhea if they just met? Were they skoodilypooping as soon as they hit the island
Obeyesekere's argument is "I'm from Sri Lanka, which makes me like all other colonized peoples, so I understand Hawaii better than White Sahlins."
GIF. GGGGGGGGGGGIF. gif. With a G. I don't care if the creator of gifs calls it a jif. Jif is a brand of peanut butter. It's G-if. Gif.
It's terrifying you know Jif as peanut butter because I know it as a cleaning product... That's dodgy as bro.
It's kind of sad that he skips over the 50000 year history of Australia and the Polynesia island
well, what exactly did happen during that 50k years and how much of it can be shown by well sourced historical records?
The show has gone pretty far out of its way to lay that down as ground rule during past episodes, e.g. the one about Mali and the african kingdoms... if we do not have much proper material to go by it doesn*t get an episode of its own. All the more if the happenings do not have much of a worldwide perspective so they would fit into the CCWH moniker of the series.
Especially since he jumps over practically all of inner european history because it only led to one king, prince or duke having a bit more land to get wealthy from instead of another one... wars and big funny hats do not truly make you important to the whole of history and JG kind of thrives of going to spots where that is different and bigger perspectives wait to be observed.
Polynesia and its cultures are fascinating, sure. But they are pretty isolated and "introverted" for most of these 50.000 years. Compare to China that undoubtedly had a giant impact on the world and its history... 99% of chinese history was gone through in a 30 second segment of "oh yeah, these are the dynasties / periods of it" and those 30 seconds also included a mongoltage...
That's not necessarily true many things have been recovered from the early polynesian and indigenous australian cultures.
Even still a little info is better than non
Moses Huf-Tirfe It's hard to make a video about that. You can't always tell broad stories and history. Mostly esoteric things about culture and beliefs. Or things that might have happened.
David A. But he can do basically 8 videos on South America and the destruction that followed
you didnt talk about australia you mentioned it you didnt give any real history like cook didnt discover aus and about the relationship bewtween soldier convict and land owners and he aboriginal peoples
I think you missed the joke about 'burring the hatchet'
bingin for ap world history 2019
You guys never talk about Guam or the Northern Mariana Islands
Just caught up on all of the crash course videos (not all in one day, of course).
I absolutely LOVE thought bubble graphics!! Bravo for the neat and humorous artwork. Also bravo to you John (and Raoul Meyer) for writing and making the show so entertaining and educational.
super annoying presentation - had to watch it for school
"Whose death via crocodile shaped - What? James Cook? No crocodiles?"
-John Green, 2012
Wow im from australia and I wont shut up. Fight me
Absolutely love the in-depth analysis of validity of sources, inherent problems with Hawaiian sources due to European-contamination, and whether that should be a deterrent on proposing such arguments. Awesome job, Mr. Green!
This guy's just being politically correct. The Europeans had ships, cannons and cloths so yeah they were more advanced and more intelligent. The truth hurts and the truth is Europeans had better technology and we're more intelligent and Europe spread it's technology all over the world, as a result most people on this planet dress, live and run their government like Europeans.
Europeans did some bad things, but they also did a lot of good, our entire planet runs on things that were built and invented by Europeans, so it's pretty funny to see non Europeans complain.
Exactly, if they hate whites so much they should stop using electricity and the internet, and practically everything else.
I would rather not be killed than have my children have technology. That is like murdering your mother to give you medicine and cellphones but still live in poverty. They were find hundreds of years without technology despite dying earlier in life from child birth and diseases.
Ah captain cook a Middlesbrough legend
Brad Watson weyyy, sound mate
You mean champion. He was from Middlesborogh no Manchester.
True
YASS Finally New Zealand!!
John! I think I’m going to take those last three questions with me into a lot of the issues I’m trying to really think critically about right now. THANK YOU FOR THOSE!
3:05 you said jifs... Grrr
One things to be said is that Cook was a very compassionate person when he started his first voyage however he eventually became desensitised in his later voyages. A good example of this is how in his early voyages he ate what his men did in order to prevent scurvy however in one of his later voyages he forced his men to eat (either seal or walrus) as their food supply was in danger
He sent a letter to the king sayin ive come to a land down under where women glow and men plunder you better run better hide do you hear the thunder lol RULE BRITTANIA
So he wasnt cooked?
He was but only to extract bones, not for consumption
pumpSHO ....... yea okay lol whatever you reckon 😂😂
Thank you James Cook for all you done for us.
A true legend and pioneer
I expected a flame war of Gif, JIF pronounciation
BTW i say its GIF :P
Not even 1 million views??
now it is
The men with the lobsters are Maori, who live in New Zealand.
Kia ora brother,
Jesse Pinkman? Breaking Bad? Anyone?
JIFs
He forgot to mention the fact that Cook was eaten. As a young child that was always the most intriguing.
Also forget that fact that Cook did not know how to swim, despite spending most of his life at sea; which is why he did not swim to the longboat with the others, remaining on the shore.
Those sources are European, can be taken as inaccurate
pumpSHO The Hawaiians were not cannibals per se, it was however apart of ritual to consume parts of an enemy or greatly venerated person once they were dead. They did not kill Cook with that purpose in mind, it is questionable if they were meaning to kill him at all. His crew attacked the village in retaliation, also seeking his remains. The frightened natives it is said, presented Cook's second in command with a newly cleaned skull, some flesh they suspected was human, and some bones of what would have been a very tall man (Cook was 6'2"); along with some clothes and belongs identified as belonging to the dead Commodore.
The Hawaiians kept parts of Cook for iconic cultural practices, as they considered him to be legendary.
The parts surrendered to his crew were given an honourary sea burial.
His heart was probably eaten, and his flesh boiled of the bones like the medieval saints. Dismembered body parts carried around in a ceremony. So not eaten in entirety, but probably in some part, as a sign of respect in their culture.
Matthew Laurence yes that would be an European point of view, the flesh that the Hawaiians gave back to the English were his buttocks as a sign of contempt, the confusion if him being eaten is because he was "cooked" (lol cook was cooked) so his bones could be taken as trophies, which is common in Hawaii
pumpSHO
Yes, that does seem a visible explanation, though they highly viewed him as someone of greatness, and islanders where asking European sailors about Cook decades after his death. We were not expressly taught that he was eaten, but it is a common knowledge thing here. Not saying your wrong. After all, I am in no authority to do so, as I know so little of Hawaiian culture.
I watch these while I eat dinner. It's like mealtime TV, but AWESOME and super crazy educational.
When you look at certain racist, imperial justifications like ''The White Man's Burden'', among other work, and quotes from European imperialists, you can't help but wonder how some of them thought of themselves as a special ''race'' destined to conquer and civilize other people (of ''color'') when their ancestors were uncivilized, and tribal themselves until the Romans came and conquered. But even then, they refused to be assimilated, and stayed tribal throughout the remainder of the empire. Some of them were truly delusional based on their racism, but others knew exactly what they were doing when they used skin color and their culture of ''civility'' as an excuse to conquer and set up imperialism.
1) Only historians and the church had access to records the Romans did not like other Europeans. It is not like their were still Roman written records all over Europe that did not decompose in forests
2)Spreading information took access to a printing press, hand written records, or person to person word of mouth all of which required people to go vast distances across Europe physically to either transport paper or a story telling person. which would be extremely expensive and only nations, world corporations, and the catholic church could afford at that time.
3)Plus only the rich traders, preists, craftsmen, kings, and government officials were literate because the poor had little schooling because it was all had to pay for private schools since few places had free education until the Industrial Revolution which made having an educated workers class profitable.
4)All groups that could have spread the information had the incentive to do the opposite
And that's why I blame the Romans :)
Ultimate Classic How exactly can you look at the world as it is today and say they were wrong? Genuinely
Why were there randomly native Maori in there?! I THOUGHT WE WERE TALKIN' HAWAIIANS?!
Because we look and sound alike
I think they are pretty different culturally :/ I mean the moko and huia feather was enough to differentiate???
Brooke Charteris maybe they were talking about cook himself exploring? What times in the video did you see Maori? But Hawaiian and Maori are the most similar of each other compared to other Polynesian languages, not like that's on topic
I just saw an image pop up as they were explaining cook's encounter with hawaiians, It came up around 6:00 minutes into the video. Watching it again though they have put a little comment box in there saying that they weren't hawaiian though. I can't remember if that was there when I commented originally. If so, i just didn't see it. (sorry.)
Brooke Charteris oh hey they were....cool but possibly confusing
U wanna really include Australia? Do a video of Ned Kelly
That Danica's hand though.
Don't come here. There's drop bears.
Drop bears are not real.
Anyone involved in studying these historical events would have the sense to judge them from the perspective of the times in which they happened and not with a cheesy grin & an inappropriate sense of smugness as they waffle contemporary politically tinged retrospectives that are an attempt to belittle these historical figures, (only if they are Caucasian of course). Anyone from any culture who had embarked on world travel (in other words whoever had been an early circumnavigater would have encountered the same problems and mis understandings as did Cook - who until his final voyage had conducted himself admirably and respected the dignity of everyone he met -thus he was respected then by all & is the man we know of today.
Finally you mentioned us
I've got a crush on you John Green.
White-bashing, so original ...
Captain Cook was a great man. He lived an interesting life and died an interesting death. His crew's documented first encounters with isolated populations are fascinating to read.
My grandmother's second husband was an explorer, and spent a few years as president of the Explorer's Club in NYC. Lowell Thomas was a friend of his, and sent him a small hand carved boat along with a note. It stated the boat had been carved by a crew member from a branch of a tree under which Cook died. There is writing on the boat with a date. The boat was supposed to go to the Peabody Museum but he died shortly after and my grandmother gave me the boat. I need to get some imaging done of the writing on the boat and the note that came with it for proof as it is getting hard to read.
And don't think to hard about how much Cook sounds like Kirk.
I would encourage anyone interested in the debates over Cook's death to go to the sources. Green gives a very distorted summary of the positions, especially of Sahlins who he grossly misrepresents. Sahlins' analysis is built from a very detailed and informed understanding of Polynesian religion and philosophy as well as the historical record. He does not present the death of Cook simply as a ritual killing, among several crude misrepresentations of his argument in this video. The debate is fascinating and important. It deserves better treatment than this.
Bit of a random question - I just started studying primary school teaching. What age group do you think students would really be able to understand and comprehend this? I am thinking of using it for an assessment to teach year 3/4. Is it appropriate?
As an Australian I can tell you I was never taught the "mistaken for a god" explanation for his death. Instead we were taught the "he was a bit of a dick to natives" explanation to his death. I don't know if that is the same for all Aussies but it was certainly part of official ciriculum when I was a kid.
Why are there 858 DISLIKES?
the rhetorical questions are such a good demonstration of what I've learned in the Post-structuralism Anthropology!!
I love this channel and the Green Brothers especially, but every once and a while...like video...they "swing and miss". With authority. lol
so there is a video mentioning about haitians, chinese, americans,japanese, koreans and russians... where is the video mentioning about South east asians??
Incorrect, he didn't map Australia, just the east coast...the dutch mapped most of the country about 165 years prior.
I am Australian and that's rude
yeah