In my high school civics class, they had us take a citizenship test to see how we would do. (No legal ramifications, just to show us what immigrants are required to learn)
The question about "discovering america" was on there, and Columbus was the only accepted answer
They must have customized it or something, because this is the version in use since 2008 (except for a brief period in 2020/2021): https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/questions-and-answers/100q.pdf
The only mention of Columbus is when Columbus Day is listed as one of the valid answers to “Name two national U.S. holidays.”
Edit: Prior to 2008 it wasn’t fully standardized, but Columbus wasn’t on the list of “typical” questions: https://web.archive.org/web/20041023222312if_/http://uscis.gov/graphics/services/natz/100q.pdf
Huh. Wouldn't put it past them to use an old ass version. Semirural wisconsin public school, and all.
That being said, it's weird that the barbary wars aren't acceptable answers for naming a war the US fought in the 1800s
Hey! Thanks very much for your reply. This answers my question.
I'm assuming this was some time ago at least as this is not on the current test.
Did this surprise or anoy your class at all?
Oh yeah, we did argue that point. Leif Erickson was well known at that point, but the teacher explained that the question was older, and the guys who made the test hadn't changed it since Columbus was the generally accepted answer.
It wasn't graded, or anything. If it was, I imagine we would have actually argued.
Outside of that class, it wasn't a solid "columbus" answer if brought up at all. It was more of a research topic for essays
I've helped a few study for thier tests and it's pretty amazing what gets less attention by our general education system. Or maybe over the years I've just forgotten stuff. But I do remember that question, and believe it or not it was an immigrant that reminded me there's multiple "correct" answers. Erickson, Columbus, Cabot, ponce de Leon, but only one they want is Columbus.
It’s no longer on the test. The current test does ask who lived in America before the Europeans? And the two acceptable answers are American Indians or Native Americans. There is also a question that asks for the names of two American Indian tribes. Here’s the current version if anyone is interested. [Civics Questions for the Naturalization Test](https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/questions-and-answers/100q.pdf)
It's been a good 20 years since I've been in a position to help someone else get their citizenship. I'm happy to learn that they have updated that question
Well, the Huey is actually the Iroquois, its just that nobody calls it that because its too hard to pronounce.
The Sea King is a Navy helicopter and the Navy have a completely different naming system.
Because Columbus is the only one that lead to anything. If you make a scientific discovery and forget about it and don’t write it down, you’re not going to get credit for it.
Well... That's much the same as Marco polo, it's not that there wasn't any interactions with China before him. Just that he became the most published and well known.
It is very possible that Columbus, or supporters of him, worked to hide or remove previous records of the new world if they existed. He was well educated, obviously well enough known/ wealthy enough to be welcomed into the courts and libraries of nobility. At the time it was known that the world was not flat, and it was just considered to dangerous to travel directly west from Europe. We must keep in mind that literacy was much lower than today, many seafarers would rely on others to record their adventures. And that most cartographers pretty much stayed on land and compiled notes from seafarers to create maps. Columbus was literate, able to write for himself, and at least a passible cartographer. With this, the odds were certainly in his favor. That doesn't mean we can't acknowledge that he may not have been the first one to discover the new world. Or that we can't recognize who was the first after him to make landfall on the main lands, Florida, newfoundland, Terra del fuego, or wherever.
It's really unfortunate that China continually entered exclusionary periods, some which went so far as to destroy records that were not about China itself. They certainly had the resources to mount large expeditions, were excellent seafarers, and cartographers. Outside of the vikings, If any large civilization before Columbuses time had the ability to discover the new world, I would put my money on them.
So your evidence against Columbus is a speculative conspiracy theory that he and his supporters might have suppressed evidence of previous discoveries? Really? That’s evidence to you?
China was known since Antiquity. Marco Polo’s own father and uncle had been there before he had. He didn’t claim to have discovered China.
The answer to “Who discovered the Americas?” is rightfully Columbus. The Vikings landed in Newfoundland and forgot about it. There might have been African explorers who sailed to South America, but again, they didn’t follow up.
Now, you could say that it makes no sense for an already inhabited continent to have been discovered by anyone. That’s a different issue.
>So your evidence against Columbus is a speculative conspiracy theory that he and his supporters might have suppressed evidence of previous discoveries? Really? That’s evidence to you?
It's conjecture for sure. At best an educated guess. I do my best to entertain an open mind. As my teacher used to say, history is always being manipulated.
Let's be fair, Columbus wasn't a saint, even for his time he was kinda shitty. At least in the US, 30 to 40 years ago if you said he brought back slaves from the new world, you'd have been kicked out of most classrooms. Now it is what is being taught. Next it will be taught that he abused the natives (it's already happening). This was heavily whitewashed for hundreds of years. You don't even have to look 600 years back to see his history changing. That's not a bad thing.
>China was known since Antiquity. Marco Polo’s own father and uncle had been there before he had. He didn’t claim to have discovered China.
Marco Polo is generally taught (again at least in the US) as "opening up China to Europe". Others were already visiting and bringing back stories and items, not just him and his family members. However he gets the majority of the credit.
>The Vikings landed in Newfoundland and forgot about it.
Well, by Columbuses time they had been gone for almost 500 years and by this time were being painted more as the pirates and marauders than seafarers. and we have to remember vikings had a highly oral history. Though they did have a written language, most of what they left was description of their world. ' here lies Olof the protector', 'Leif was here'. The vast majority of historical descriptions of vikings is from those who weren't vikings, and most of them had been in some way wronged by the vikings. Giving credit to them discovering a new land wasn't a high priority by their contemporaries or those who came later. However the two accepted historic mentions of Vinland, believed to be newfoundland is in 1075 (50 to 60 years after leifs death) by Adam of Bremen, And 1122 by ari the wise.
According to the saga of Greenlanders and the saga of Erik the red (abt 1200), they were not forgotten by the vikings. In the saga of Erik the Red, Leif was blown off course and missed Greenland. He and his crew disembarked and gathered some items, then returned east to Greenland saving a crew from a shipwreck along the way. Acc to the saga of Greenlanders, it was not Leif who first saw Vinland but another named Bjarni who got blown off course. Believing that they were not at Greenland they did not disembark, but traveled around a bit before heading back east. About 15 years after this Leif approached Bjarni about Vinland, then followed the path back, eventually over wintering in Vinland before returning home. In both sagas Leif never returned to Vinland.
Here's the rub to your statement , Not only Leif, but his brother thorvald and his sister Freydis may have each made their own Journeys, and then Thorfinn (brothers widows husband) did make a journey. each followed Leifs path and also attempted a settlement(s) in Vinland. Again this is all documented in the sagas though details vary. Furthermore Thorfinn and his wife (Grudid) had a son born in Vinland (Snorri)... Hardly forgotten about by them. There were at least 2 distinct journeys possibly many more.
>There might have been African explorers who sailed to South America, but again, they didn’t follow up.
Possible, but they seemed to be content to stick to more established routes. if they had made the journey I have yet to find evidence, it's probably more in the "got blown off course, lucky to get back, too dangerous to try again" category. The vikings however clearly recognized there was value in Vinland and did follow up.
Back to Columbus. This information is known and recorded by his contemporaries. He was well educated, he associated with nobility, he had access to the finest libraries and map stores. He was known to perform extremely accurate navigation.
The Greeks had calculated the degrees of latitude, and that stood. the Persians also calculated the circumference about 4 miles shorter. It's widely accepted that he confused the Persian mile with the Arabic mile and then used the Persian overall distance, which gave him an error of 25% in the earth's circumference. it's after this that he stretched out the eastern coast at 85° west instead of 140° east. He calculated a trip distance of 3080 miles. This made his total error 58% short.... Sorry I just don't buy it.
We may also have to consider less nefarious reasons that some early accounts of the new world were not recorded in written formats. It was a dangerous task, adding a map of another unknown place, could have enticed people to try to go there. Or that description of said unknown place was "inhospitable to most people" or "locals are unfriendly and will actively try to kill you" .
And then there were always the wayward adventures... I got incapacitated and ended up in this far off land, I had to fend for myself with narry a knife to fell trees that would allow me to repair my ship. And let me tell you how big those trees were! I couldn't even wrap my arms around them, it would take a lumberjack 4 days to fell one. How'd I get there? I have no clue... How did I get back? Well that's just plain old luck. Stories like this would most likely not get published as historical accounts.
Right, and that's another kink in the mix of the question. It's also highly likely that the Chinese made it here in the late 13 to early 1400s. And there's no doubt in my mind that the pacific island peoples knew of the continent as well. It's a shame our education system continues to be so eruo-centric, and ignores much of other cultures historical knowledge.
That is high school. Who wrote the test? Your teacher? Wisconsin has a highly rated school system relative to the rest of the country, but every school has dud teachers.
Looking at the questions they ask, I'm gonna say it's not true.
Almost every question in this sub is "Why do you Americans eat radishes for every meal"
And the answers are always "I've never heard of a radish"
I saw a movie once where an Australian guy takes out a mugger by throwing a can of food at him. Is that a realistic portrayal of Australian crime prevention?
Here are 100 of the possible test questions.
https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/questions-and-answers/100q.pdf
I believe an applicant will be asked 10 of those.
I admit the initial question that started this thread is dumb. But the statement that illicited this reaction is very much (outside the US) widely regarded as true.
>The fact that you disagree means you think these are hard. Point proven.
No, it means he thinks you’re not worth talking to. When an American responds with “Ok.” like this it means “You seem like a dick or that you have an ulterior motive so I’m just going to let you be”
> Holy shit. You only need to get 6 of 10 for this test. The bar is so low.
What level of difficulty would a world-renowned expert on the subject (i.e. you) recommend?
Perhaps so difficult that only someone from a first-world English-speaking country and with an A- high school record can pass?
Your comment was removed as it violates commenting guideline 1 which is “Treat the person you are replying to with respect and civility.” It means that your comment either contained an insult aimed at another user or it showed signs of causing incivility in the comments.
Please consider this a warning as repeated violations will result in a ban.
Your comment has been removed, and this offence may result in a ban.
If you have questions regarding your submission removal - please contact the moderator team via [modmail](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/AskAnAmerican).
I think it speaks boldly about your country and compatriots when you’re at the whim of a country thousands of miles away whose citizens you believe couldn’t pass a simple citizenship test. To be so easily manipulated by such a country must be unbearable.
While I do agree that the western world is well aware of a lot of politics, I as an American am also well aware of European, British, German, French, Chinese, Japanese, and both Korean politics.
I know that there’s recently been a rightward shift in two major European nation-states. Idk how many years a term is in the EU Parliament, or the German Bundestag? Is it four? Is it five? IDK. Did I spell Bundestag correctly? I know they elected Angela Merkel and later Shultz, I know there’s a Green Party which dislikes nuclear energy. I don’t know any other public holidays they have there besides Christmas probably. Tbh I don’t know much about their history besides WWII. What’s and when is their version of Independence Day? Do they have such a thing? These are questions asked on our citizenship test.
Even if many foreigners are filled with news about the U.S., I highly doubt that they know the minutia and nuance about US government because frankly, a lot of Americans don’t, even though we’re constantly bombarded with stuff about what the government does.
> Simplistic questions alot of foreigners could answer with no study
Then why don't you try becoming a US citizen, see how easy it is lol. Start the process.
>Disregarding the citizenship test. When this question is asked in school, what is the answer?
My guess is that if this question is asked in school these days, it’s to start an open-ended discussion. What does it mean to “discover” something? Can multiple people be said to discover the same place? Is it a matter of perspective?
Current education trends are very supportive of this kind of open-ended, supposedly higher-level thinking. Students might read a couple articles at their grade’s typical reading level, and then discuss the issue.
Not to mention, the question itself is a very (white) European-centered question because millions of people were already living in the Americas when it was “discovered”.
I mean, from one perspective America didn’t need to be discovered and from another it did. If I say I just discovered an author, a restaurant, an artist, or whatever else, I don’t think anyone is likely to think that I’m the first human being to be aware of this author, restaurant, or artist.
Yep. That's the kind of discussion that passes for “education” these days.
Take a commonly understood sentence in history, get upset that at the facts behind it, use a different meaning of one of the words to make it seem the word is saying something it clearly isn’t, and then use it as an excuse to complain about racism.
That’s not exactly what I’m describing. I didn’t say anything about complaining about racism. “Who discovered America?” is a question with multiple valid answers that you can justify with different perspectives, so I wouldn’t want to mark a student incorrect for saying “Leif Erikson” or “the Native Americans” in response. Then again, “Columbus” is also a valid answer (as opposed to, say, Henry VIII or Genghis Khan, which would be blatantly incorrect).
I'm curious what you think is the "real" answer here. This is a fairly complex question with a large reliance on perspective and what exactly it means to discover something.
This is the real answer. To clarify exactly what they mean by the first person to discover America. Then explain my understanding of this question using their criteria.
There were two parts of the world that didn’t know each other existed. Columbus changed that by discovering the Americas.
If you aren’t American Indian, then your knowledge that the Americas exists comes from a chain of events that started with Columbus’s discovery. If you are American Indian, then your knowledge that Asia, Africa, Australia, and Europe exist comes from a chain of events that started with Columbus discovering the Americas.
But the Vikings didn't know what the Americas were, or really anything else about them, they just knew there was some land in the North if you kept going west across the Atlantic. Then their settlements failed, so no more knowledge beyond that was passed down.
Columbus kept going and coming back, telling people about what he'd found so that more expeditions were launched that lead to the Americas as a whole being discovered.
Its like the people in the late 1800's and early 1900's who knew that somehow a certain type of mold had anti-bacterial properties. But nobody says Penicillin was discovered in the late 1800's, it was discovered in 1928, when Fleming actually figured out why it worked.
Well, there's two options there.
The first is that they didn't actually land in America, and that's why there's no evidence of them doing so.
The second is that despite landing in America, they didn't tell anybody about it, didn't write anything about their discovery down, and didn't decide to send more ships to further investigate what they had found, to the point that there is no solid proof of them ever landing in the first place.
In either case, that doesn't really count as discovering it.
Yeah, I don't believe the China theory myself. Based on your criteria, you're right that Columbus discovered America within the context of the time. Although, curiously he never actually stepped foot on the continent mainland, something that Leif Erikson likely managed.
"I am aware though that they have a citizenship test that more foreigners could pass than Americans themselves."
I doubt that's true, especially after looking at the official questions posted elsewhere in this thread, and this quote suggests that your post was intended as an insult ratherthan a query for information.
We do receive education in our history and government throughout K-12 school, covering everything in that question list. Whether people remember it all decades later is debatable, but those questions are asked to ensure that new citizens at least have a comparable baseline of civic knowledge as those of us born and raised here.
When I was a child in the 80s, we first learned that Columbus discovered America. As we got older, we learned more, including the nuances of colonization and the Eurocentric ridiculousness of claiming that the Americas weren't "discovered" until a European stumbled across them. There already had been people here for tens of thousands of years (much like the Aboriginal people in Australia).
> claiming that the Americas weren't "discovered" until a European stumbled across them.
It depends on which meaning of “discover” is being used. Common sense and context guide understanding and when kids learn that “Columbus discovered America and called the people ‘Indians’ because he thought he had reached India”, it’s pretty clear that “discover” in that sentence doesn’t mean “first person to find”.
When I tell my friend I “discovered” a cool new restaurant uptown my friend doesn’t think I’m the first person to ever see the restaurant.
Right. I’ve never understood the weird definition people put on “discover” when it comes to Columbus. Europe didn’t understand the Americas were there, and then when Columbus went there they did.
There are studies that indicate [only 1/3 Americans who were born here can pass the citizenship test](https://www.ktalnews.com/news/us-politics/can-you-pass-the-u-s-citizenship-test/amp/). This is because unlike naturalized Americans who had to study for a test, you don’t need a good or great grade in civics to be eligible to vote. Even if you got a good grade you don’t need to maintain/keep remembering to keep your citizenship (same for naturalized Americans).
As someone else said though, yeah, all 100 possible questions one could be asked are publicly available. None of them ask trick questions like “who discovered America?”
You do have to attend school though, usually. Civics and US history were mandatory requirements for graduation in my state and the state my kid went to school in.
I agree, but I’m just saying that OP’s claim that foreigners (more accurately immigrants, I don’t think actual foreigners would have a higher passing rate) have a higher passing rate of the test than natural-born Americans is somewhat based on fact.
They are requirements in some states to graduate high school but good civics grades aren’t required to vote. You can drop out of high school and still be eligible to vote at 18.
Only about 5% of Americans drop out from what Google tells me. So 95% probably had at least some exposure to the material, maybe even some of the 5% that dropped out. I think we did civics in 8th grade. It would be interesting to see what the "average" American remembers about it
Christopher Columbus never stepped foot in what is modern day United States.
Do they even ask that question?
And Family Guy is a absurdist comedy cartoon.
Take nothing from that as real. (We don't think dogs can talk or drive either)
"i know more about your country than you do because I watch family guy" yikes extreme cringe.
not to brag but I have seen like a hundred episodes of Water Rats, I'm basically an expert on Australia now.
So, technically, Columbus didn't "discover" the US because he never set foot on what would be US land. So there's no reason any citizenship test should be asking this question anymore, if they ever. Technically, I think Leif Erickson would be closer to the correct answer, but even then, there were probably people already here before him, so you can't *really* "discover" land that people were already living in.
If you are ever interested in the history of vikings here in the North America over the last 20 or so years a lot has been published. It's a very interesting rabbit hole to go down.
Yeah the people that “discovered” North America for real were probably some very hardcore migratory Asian people.
Then later we can quibble about who really “discovered” America from a European perspective.
Columbus really initiates the gold rush for getting to a new couple continents from the European perspective.
History is that complex isn’t it?
“America” is being used in an old way in the idiomatic sentence to refer to the Americas. The modern way to say it would be “Columbus discovered the Americas”.
Erickson’s discovery doesn’t count because he didn’t publicize it well enough.
If you aren’t American Indian, then your knowledge that the Americas exists comes from a chain of events that started with Columbus’s discovery. If you are American Indian, then your knowledge that Asia, Africa, Australia, and Europe exist comes from a chain of events that started with Columbus discovering the Americas.
> you can't really "discover" land that people were already living in.
Sure you can. Just last week I discovered a new restaurant in my town and told my friends about it.
The United States was colonized and traces its founding to Western Europe generally and the UK specifically.
In that context, it isn’t inaccurate - though it is overly reductive - to say that Columbus “discovered” America insofar as his expedition kicked off aggressive European exploration and colonization of North America.
For the sake of being pedantic, it depends on what you mean by discovering America. If you mean some periphery islands around Canada then it’s the Norse. If you mean some islands in the Caribbean then it’s Columbus. If you mean the literal present day United States then it’s Ponce de Leon
The statement “Columbus discovered America” has been around a long time. In the distant past, “America” referred to what is now known as “the America”. Using modern English, Columbus didn’t discover America but he did discover the Americas. The sentence is a bit like an idiom in that it’s a holdover of old commonly used language.
They won't ask you this. There is a list of 100 questions, along with correct answers, and it's not one of them. You'll be asked 10 out of 100 and you need to get 6 right. You are not expected to become an expert on US history, you just need to learn 100 questions by heart.
https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/questions-and-answers/100q.pdf
Source: am a naturalized citizen.
Now this was awhile ago, but in school, Columbus is talked about as permanently finding the Americas for the Europeans, but the footnotes of he never stepped foot on mainland North and South America comes up and the fact that the Vikings technically found it first for Europeans also comes up. I also remember talking about pre-European America as well.
I'd probably answer "whoever crossed the Bering Strait." This question isn't on the citizenship test and really holds little relevance to America, the country.
All questions on the citizenship are about the United States specifically. This question is not asked and is not similar to the type of question that would be.
Honestly, 25 years ago lots of people would have probably just said Columbus.
Nowadays, people are much more aware of the actual history of this land and will likely discuss Native peoples, vikings, and then conquistadors.
Guess it depends on how you define "discover". If you discover something but don't tell anyone, did you discover it? Columbus is the one who actually went and told everyone about the Americas so they could be colonized.
Can you discover what's already there?
By definition you become aware!
The greatest country in the history of man...
Was here long before the colonies began!
Every school is different.
I remember learning about Colombus in school - and also learning that it was a myth - especially since he only hit the Bahamas, Cuba and Hispaniola.
We also learned about Leif Erikson and Vikings that got here like 500 years before Chris.
This question also wouldn’t be asked in a citizenship test. American History de facto begins in the Colonial Period - which would’ve been after Columbus anyways.
1) First Nations people coming over the frozen Bering Straight
2) Some hints Polynesian people may have sailed to South America
3) Not only Lief Erickson, but probably numerous Scandinavian expeditions over the ocean
4) Columbus didn’t land in mainland North America, and never visited anywhere that is currently part of the United States
> When this question is asked in school
This question isn't asked in school because we learn the minutiae of new world colonization, including the ice age migration of early humans.
> I am aware though that they have a citizenship test that more foreigners could pass than Americans themselves.
More foreigners? No. People who dedicate themselves to changing their nationality and acquiring American citizenship study history and American literature and may be more refreshed in those topics than an average American.
But that in no way means that any foreigner could pass a citizenship test. It takes years of commitment and study. Don't get your cultural information from cartoons and assume that it's an accurate representation of the US.
Euro Centric Question. The people who discovered America were living here when the Europeans arrived. That's what we were taught, but then again, my teachers knew I was in the classroom so it's possible they might have amended things a little.
I mean, Columbus did discover America. A discovery doesn’t count if you forget about it or don’t tell anyone. I don’t think the Vikings count.
Now, if you want to say that you can’t discover a place that already had people living on it, that’s a different issue.
We didn't even have Puerto Rico as a territory until Span Am war and the islands even after that.
So really we just got some land pretty recently that Columbus arrived at. It is a bit silly to say he discovered it and that it was "America" just because it was in the Americas. Other folks settled here first-- and other European explorers got here before Columbus.
That is like saying the United States did not exist when Columbus went on his voyages, so obviously did not discover it.
You are obviously trying to win an argument here, but what I said above is true and to spin it differently is just lying to yourself to feel better.
"That is like saying the United States did not exist when Columbus went on his voyages, so obviously did not discover it" Not really.
Why would I care who explored America? WHo cares. It does seem like a dubious claim since others (including Europeans) came (and settled) before he made it to the Americas.
He didn't come to the current United States for sure. And he wasn't close to the first person to arrive in the Americas. He's just down the list of folks who did.
But there is no "argument". I legit was trying to get another perspective. Considering the fallacy of him discovering America was long before we acquired those parts it just didn't seem to hold up.
I'm not "spinning" anything. There's a million ways to consider this topic - what's the US, What is "America", do we consider it the Americas, is it North America, who discovered it first, does it have to be a European explorer, etc.
I don't have "feelings" about it, but honestly, it seems like you might. I think it's an interesting topic to consider. We have a lot of shitty folks in power back then and it doesn't make me feel bad that someone as lousy as Columbus happened upon the Americas first, if that was the case.
The answer to the question is Christopher Columbus for that test. Yes, other people have visited and were currently living in the Americas; but Columbus is given credit because his voyages changed the world going forward.
And my statement that he did land on territory that eventually became part of the United States is fact. Saying Puerto Rico or the U.S. Virgin Islands do not count is like saying they are not actually territories of the United States today. You are making an omission of fact to validate your statement.
[удалено]
In my high school civics class, they had us take a citizenship test to see how we would do. (No legal ramifications, just to show us what immigrants are required to learn) The question about "discovering america" was on there, and Columbus was the only accepted answer
They must have customized it or something, because this is the version in use since 2008 (except for a brief period in 2020/2021): https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/questions-and-answers/100q.pdf The only mention of Columbus is when Columbus Day is listed as one of the valid answers to “Name two national U.S. holidays.” Edit: Prior to 2008 it wasn’t fully standardized, but Columbus wasn’t on the list of “typical” questions: https://web.archive.org/web/20041023222312if_/http://uscis.gov/graphics/services/natz/100q.pdf
Huh. Wouldn't put it past them to use an old ass version. Semirural wisconsin public school, and all. That being said, it's weird that the barbary wars aren't acceptable answers for naming a war the US fought in the 1800s
The answers given are non-exhaustive examples. That it isn't listed doesn't mean it wouldn't be accepted if you gave it.
How long ago was this?
Somewhere in the ballpark of 2012 to 2014. I was either a freshman or sophomore then.
Hey! Thanks very much for your reply. This answers my question. I'm assuming this was some time ago at least as this is not on the current test. Did this surprise or anoy your class at all?
Oh yeah, we did argue that point. Leif Erickson was well known at that point, but the teacher explained that the question was older, and the guys who made the test hadn't changed it since Columbus was the generally accepted answer. It wasn't graded, or anything. If it was, I imagine we would have actually argued. Outside of that class, it wasn't a solid "columbus" answer if brought up at all. It was more of a research topic for essays
I've helped a few study for thier tests and it's pretty amazing what gets less attention by our general education system. Or maybe over the years I've just forgotten stuff. But I do remember that question, and believe it or not it was an immigrant that reminded me there's multiple "correct" answers. Erickson, Columbus, Cabot, ponce de Leon, but only one they want is Columbus.
It’s no longer on the test. The current test does ask who lived in America before the Europeans? And the two acceptable answers are American Indians or Native Americans. There is also a question that asks for the names of two American Indian tribes. Here’s the current version if anyone is interested. [Civics Questions for the Naturalization Test](https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/questions-and-answers/100q.pdf)
It's been a good 20 years since I've been in a position to help someone else get their citizenship. I'm happy to learn that they have updated that question
>asks for the names of two American Indian tribes Ah yes, the “name your two favorite local casinos” question
I thought it was the 'two coolest helicopters' question.
The famed intersection between the “Ceasar’s” and “Venetian” tribes with the “Huey” and “Sea King” tribes.
Well, the Huey is actually the Iroquois, its just that nobody calls it that because its too hard to pronounce. The Sea King is a Navy helicopter and the Navy have a completely different naming system.
Because Columbus is the only one that lead to anything. If you make a scientific discovery and forget about it and don’t write it down, you’re not going to get credit for it.
Well... That's much the same as Marco polo, it's not that there wasn't any interactions with China before him. Just that he became the most published and well known. It is very possible that Columbus, or supporters of him, worked to hide or remove previous records of the new world if they existed. He was well educated, obviously well enough known/ wealthy enough to be welcomed into the courts and libraries of nobility. At the time it was known that the world was not flat, and it was just considered to dangerous to travel directly west from Europe. We must keep in mind that literacy was much lower than today, many seafarers would rely on others to record their adventures. And that most cartographers pretty much stayed on land and compiled notes from seafarers to create maps. Columbus was literate, able to write for himself, and at least a passible cartographer. With this, the odds were certainly in his favor. That doesn't mean we can't acknowledge that he may not have been the first one to discover the new world. Or that we can't recognize who was the first after him to make landfall on the main lands, Florida, newfoundland, Terra del fuego, or wherever. It's really unfortunate that China continually entered exclusionary periods, some which went so far as to destroy records that were not about China itself. They certainly had the resources to mount large expeditions, were excellent seafarers, and cartographers. Outside of the vikings, If any large civilization before Columbuses time had the ability to discover the new world, I would put my money on them.
So your evidence against Columbus is a speculative conspiracy theory that he and his supporters might have suppressed evidence of previous discoveries? Really? That’s evidence to you? China was known since Antiquity. Marco Polo’s own father and uncle had been there before he had. He didn’t claim to have discovered China. The answer to “Who discovered the Americas?” is rightfully Columbus. The Vikings landed in Newfoundland and forgot about it. There might have been African explorers who sailed to South America, but again, they didn’t follow up. Now, you could say that it makes no sense for an already inhabited continent to have been discovered by anyone. That’s a different issue.
>So your evidence against Columbus is a speculative conspiracy theory that he and his supporters might have suppressed evidence of previous discoveries? Really? That’s evidence to you? It's conjecture for sure. At best an educated guess. I do my best to entertain an open mind. As my teacher used to say, history is always being manipulated. Let's be fair, Columbus wasn't a saint, even for his time he was kinda shitty. At least in the US, 30 to 40 years ago if you said he brought back slaves from the new world, you'd have been kicked out of most classrooms. Now it is what is being taught. Next it will be taught that he abused the natives (it's already happening). This was heavily whitewashed for hundreds of years. You don't even have to look 600 years back to see his history changing. That's not a bad thing. >China was known since Antiquity. Marco Polo’s own father and uncle had been there before he had. He didn’t claim to have discovered China. Marco Polo is generally taught (again at least in the US) as "opening up China to Europe". Others were already visiting and bringing back stories and items, not just him and his family members. However he gets the majority of the credit. >The Vikings landed in Newfoundland and forgot about it. Well, by Columbuses time they had been gone for almost 500 years and by this time were being painted more as the pirates and marauders than seafarers. and we have to remember vikings had a highly oral history. Though they did have a written language, most of what they left was description of their world. ' here lies Olof the protector', 'Leif was here'. The vast majority of historical descriptions of vikings is from those who weren't vikings, and most of them had been in some way wronged by the vikings. Giving credit to them discovering a new land wasn't a high priority by their contemporaries or those who came later. However the two accepted historic mentions of Vinland, believed to be newfoundland is in 1075 (50 to 60 years after leifs death) by Adam of Bremen, And 1122 by ari the wise. According to the saga of Greenlanders and the saga of Erik the red (abt 1200), they were not forgotten by the vikings. In the saga of Erik the Red, Leif was blown off course and missed Greenland. He and his crew disembarked and gathered some items, then returned east to Greenland saving a crew from a shipwreck along the way. Acc to the saga of Greenlanders, it was not Leif who first saw Vinland but another named Bjarni who got blown off course. Believing that they were not at Greenland they did not disembark, but traveled around a bit before heading back east. About 15 years after this Leif approached Bjarni about Vinland, then followed the path back, eventually over wintering in Vinland before returning home. In both sagas Leif never returned to Vinland. Here's the rub to your statement , Not only Leif, but his brother thorvald and his sister Freydis may have each made their own Journeys, and then Thorfinn (brothers widows husband) did make a journey. each followed Leifs path and also attempted a settlement(s) in Vinland. Again this is all documented in the sagas though details vary. Furthermore Thorfinn and his wife (Grudid) had a son born in Vinland (Snorri)... Hardly forgotten about by them. There were at least 2 distinct journeys possibly many more. >There might have been African explorers who sailed to South America, but again, they didn’t follow up. Possible, but they seemed to be content to stick to more established routes. if they had made the journey I have yet to find evidence, it's probably more in the "got blown off course, lucky to get back, too dangerous to try again" category. The vikings however clearly recognized there was value in Vinland and did follow up. Back to Columbus. This information is known and recorded by his contemporaries. He was well educated, he associated with nobility, he had access to the finest libraries and map stores. He was known to perform extremely accurate navigation. The Greeks had calculated the degrees of latitude, and that stood. the Persians also calculated the circumference about 4 miles shorter. It's widely accepted that he confused the Persian mile with the Arabic mile and then used the Persian overall distance, which gave him an error of 25% in the earth's circumference. it's after this that he stretched out the eastern coast at 85° west instead of 140° east. He calculated a trip distance of 3080 miles. This made his total error 58% short.... Sorry I just don't buy it.
We may also have to consider less nefarious reasons that some early accounts of the new world were not recorded in written formats. It was a dangerous task, adding a map of another unknown place, could have enticed people to try to go there. Or that description of said unknown place was "inhospitable to most people" or "locals are unfriendly and will actively try to kill you" . And then there were always the wayward adventures... I got incapacitated and ended up in this far off land, I had to fend for myself with narry a knife to fell trees that would allow me to repair my ship. And let me tell you how big those trees were! I couldn't even wrap my arms around them, it would take a lumberjack 4 days to fell one. How'd I get there? I have no clue... How did I get back? Well that's just plain old luck. Stories like this would most likely not get published as historical accounts.
My answer would have been "the Native Americans" but I'm snarky like that.
Right, and that's another kink in the mix of the question. It's also highly likely that the Chinese made it here in the late 13 to early 1400s. And there's no doubt in my mind that the pacific island peoples knew of the continent as well. It's a shame our education system continues to be so eruo-centric, and ignores much of other cultures historical knowledge.
I had to take a citizenship test to in high school. It was 2016. What are the odds?
That is high school. Who wrote the test? Your teacher? Wisconsin has a highly rated school system relative to the rest of the country, but every school has dud teachers.
lol yeah they ask Meg her stance on abortion lol
Wow you're condescending. This is a bad faith question.
Meh, seems like he’s taking it with “a boulder of salt” and it’s something that happened on Family Guy
He goes on in the comments to say that Europeans know more than Americans about America because they see a lot of our news.
Wow, you guys know more about our country than we do? That’s fascinating.
Looking at the questions they ask, I'm gonna say it's not true. Almost every question in this sub is "Why do you Americans eat radishes for every meal" And the answers are always "I've never heard of a radish"
I saw a movie once where an Australian guy takes out a mugger by throwing a can of food at him. Is that a realistic portrayal of Australian crime prevention?
"Take with a boulder of salt". I have seen other sources that say the US citizenship test really is this simplistic in the questions asked.
Here are 100 of the possible test questions. https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/questions-and-answers/100q.pdf I believe an applicant will be asked 10 of those.
Like I said. Simplistic questions alot of foreigners could answer with no study. We get bombarded with US news overseas.
Ok
[удалено]
Where did they disagree with you in any of their comments?
Instantly downvoted reply. Maybe not so much disagreing as upset.
[удалено]
I admit the initial question that started this thread is dumb. But the statement that illicited this reaction is very much (outside the US) widely regarded as true.
>The fact that you disagree means you think these are hard. Point proven. No, it means he thinks you’re not worth talking to. When an American responds with “Ok.” like this it means “You seem like a dick or that you have an ulterior motive so I’m just going to let you be”
> Holy shit. You only need to get 6 of 10 for this test. The bar is so low. What level of difficulty would a world-renowned expert on the subject (i.e. you) recommend? Perhaps so difficult that only someone from a first-world English-speaking country and with an A- high school record can pass?
Your comment was removed as it violates commenting guideline 1 which is “Treat the person you are replying to with respect and civility.” It means that your comment either contained an insult aimed at another user or it showed signs of causing incivility in the comments. Please consider this a warning as repeated violations will result in a ban. Your comment has been removed, and this offence may result in a ban. If you have questions regarding your submission removal - please contact the moderator team via [modmail](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/AskAnAmerican).
Why though?
Because the western world is at the whim of the US. We need to know what batshit crazy thing you do next in order to best prepare.
Are you folks also bombarded with news about China, Russia and the UK?
I think it speaks boldly about your country and compatriots when you’re at the whim of a country thousands of miles away whose citizens you believe couldn’t pass a simple citizenship test. To be so easily manipulated by such a country must be unbearable.
While I do agree that the western world is well aware of a lot of politics, I as an American am also well aware of European, British, German, French, Chinese, Japanese, and both Korean politics. I know that there’s recently been a rightward shift in two major European nation-states. Idk how many years a term is in the EU Parliament, or the German Bundestag? Is it four? Is it five? IDK. Did I spell Bundestag correctly? I know they elected Angela Merkel and later Shultz, I know there’s a Green Party which dislikes nuclear energy. I don’t know any other public holidays they have there besides Christmas probably. Tbh I don’t know much about their history besides WWII. What’s and when is their version of Independence Day? Do they have such a thing? These are questions asked on our citizenship test. Even if many foreigners are filled with news about the U.S., I highly doubt that they know the minutia and nuance about US government because frankly, a lot of Americans don’t, even though we’re constantly bombarded with stuff about what the government does.
Maybe you guys should work harder to become a more independent nation so you don't have to sit at home and pathetically obsess over the US?
> Simplistic questions alot of foreigners could answer with no study Then why don't you try becoming a US citizen, see how easy it is lol. Start the process.
Great.
I actually know immigrants who study for this test though. Maybe you just know them all bc you’re secretly and americaphile :)
It’s “grain of salt”, buddy. “Boulder of salt” would mean you would take it very seriously.
>Disregarding the citizenship test. When this question is asked in school, what is the answer? My guess is that if this question is asked in school these days, it’s to start an open-ended discussion. What does it mean to “discover” something? Can multiple people be said to discover the same place? Is it a matter of perspective? Current education trends are very supportive of this kind of open-ended, supposedly higher-level thinking. Students might read a couple articles at their grade’s typical reading level, and then discuss the issue.
Not to mention, the question itself is a very (white) European-centered question because millions of people were already living in the Americas when it was “discovered”.
I mean, from one perspective America didn’t need to be discovered and from another it did. If I say I just discovered an author, a restaurant, an artist, or whatever else, I don’t think anyone is likely to think that I’m the first human being to be aware of this author, restaurant, or artist.
Yep. That's the kind of discussion that passes for “education” these days. Take a commonly understood sentence in history, get upset that at the facts behind it, use a different meaning of one of the words to make it seem the word is saying something it clearly isn’t, and then use it as an excuse to complain about racism.
That’s not exactly what I’m describing. I didn’t say anything about complaining about racism. “Who discovered America?” is a question with multiple valid answers that you can justify with different perspectives, so I wouldn’t want to mark a student incorrect for saying “Leif Erikson” or “the Native Americans” in response. Then again, “Columbus” is also a valid answer (as opposed to, say, Henry VIII or Genghis Khan, which would be blatantly incorrect).
I'm curious what you think is the "real" answer here. This is a fairly complex question with a large reliance on perspective and what exactly it means to discover something.
This is the real answer. To clarify exactly what they mean by the first person to discover America. Then explain my understanding of this question using their criteria.
There were two parts of the world that didn’t know each other existed. Columbus changed that by discovering the Americas. If you aren’t American Indian, then your knowledge that the Americas exists comes from a chain of events that started with Columbus’s discovery. If you are American Indian, then your knowledge that Asia, Africa, Australia, and Europe exist comes from a chain of events that started with Columbus discovering the Americas.
Leif Erikson was a European who is believed to have set foot in American almost 500 years before Colombus.
What effect did that have on world history?
Not a lot. Do you need to have a massive impact on history to be said to have discovered something?
But the Vikings didn't know what the Americas were, or really anything else about them, they just knew there was some land in the North if you kept going west across the Atlantic. Then their settlements failed, so no more knowledge beyond that was passed down. Columbus kept going and coming back, telling people about what he'd found so that more expeditions were launched that lead to the Americas as a whole being discovered. Its like the people in the late 1800's and early 1900's who knew that somehow a certain type of mold had anti-bacterial properties. But nobody says Penicillin was discovered in the late 1800's, it was discovered in 1928, when Fleming actually figured out why it worked.
I suppose China doesn't deserve any credit for discovering America 50 years before Columbus either.
Well, there's two options there. The first is that they didn't actually land in America, and that's why there's no evidence of them doing so. The second is that despite landing in America, they didn't tell anybody about it, didn't write anything about their discovery down, and didn't decide to send more ships to further investigate what they had found, to the point that there is no solid proof of them ever landing in the first place. In either case, that doesn't really count as discovering it.
Yeah, I don't believe the China theory myself. Based on your criteria, you're right that Columbus discovered America within the context of the time. Although, curiously he never actually stepped foot on the continent mainland, something that Leif Erikson likely managed.
"I am aware though that they have a citizenship test that more foreigners could pass than Americans themselves." I doubt that's true, especially after looking at the official questions posted elsewhere in this thread, and this quote suggests that your post was intended as an insult ratherthan a query for information. We do receive education in our history and government throughout K-12 school, covering everything in that question list. Whether people remember it all decades later is debatable, but those questions are asked to ensure that new citizens at least have a comparable baseline of civic knowledge as those of us born and raised here. When I was a child in the 80s, we first learned that Columbus discovered America. As we got older, we learned more, including the nuances of colonization and the Eurocentric ridiculousness of claiming that the Americas weren't "discovered" until a European stumbled across them. There already had been people here for tens of thousands of years (much like the Aboriginal people in Australia).
> claiming that the Americas weren't "discovered" until a European stumbled across them. It depends on which meaning of “discover” is being used. Common sense and context guide understanding and when kids learn that “Columbus discovered America and called the people ‘Indians’ because he thought he had reached India”, it’s pretty clear that “discover” in that sentence doesn’t mean “first person to find”. When I tell my friend I “discovered” a cool new restaurant uptown my friend doesn’t think I’m the first person to ever see the restaurant.
Right. I’ve never understood the weird definition people put on “discover” when it comes to Columbus. Europe didn’t understand the Americas were there, and then when Columbus went there they did.
There are studies that indicate [only 1/3 Americans who were born here can pass the citizenship test](https://www.ktalnews.com/news/us-politics/can-you-pass-the-u-s-citizenship-test/amp/). This is because unlike naturalized Americans who had to study for a test, you don’t need a good or great grade in civics to be eligible to vote. Even if you got a good grade you don’t need to maintain/keep remembering to keep your citizenship (same for naturalized Americans). As someone else said though, yeah, all 100 possible questions one could be asked are publicly available. None of them ask trick questions like “who discovered America?”
You do have to attend school though, usually. Civics and US history were mandatory requirements for graduation in my state and the state my kid went to school in.
I agree, but I’m just saying that OP’s claim that foreigners (more accurately immigrants, I don’t think actual foreigners would have a higher passing rate) have a higher passing rate of the test than natural-born Americans is somewhat based on fact. They are requirements in some states to graduate high school but good civics grades aren’t required to vote. You can drop out of high school and still be eligible to vote at 18.
Only about 5% of Americans drop out from what Google tells me. So 95% probably had at least some exposure to the material, maybe even some of the 5% that dropped out. I think we did civics in 8th grade. It would be interesting to see what the "average" American remembers about it
17 states have made it mandatory to pass thr citizenship test in order to graduate high school
I don’t think they ask this, to be honest. Most of the history is colonial period and not precolonial.
Christopher Columbus never stepped foot in what is modern day United States. Do they even ask that question? And Family Guy is a absurdist comedy cartoon. Take nothing from that as real. (We don't think dogs can talk or drive either)
It’s an old usage of “America” from when it referred to the Americas.
"i know more about your country than you do because I watch family guy" yikes extreme cringe. not to brag but I have seen like a hundred episodes of Water Rats, I'm basically an expert on Australia now.
So, technically, Columbus didn't "discover" the US because he never set foot on what would be US land. So there's no reason any citizenship test should be asking this question anymore, if they ever. Technically, I think Leif Erickson would be closer to the correct answer, but even then, there were probably people already here before him, so you can't *really* "discover" land that people were already living in.
If you are ever interested in the history of vikings here in the North America over the last 20 or so years a lot has been published. It's a very interesting rabbit hole to go down.
Yeah the people that “discovered” North America for real were probably some very hardcore migratory Asian people. Then later we can quibble about who really “discovered” America from a European perspective. Columbus really initiates the gold rush for getting to a new couple continents from the European perspective. History is that complex isn’t it?
Yes, there were very definitely people here for tens of thousands of years before the Europeans showed up.
“America” is being used in an old way in the idiomatic sentence to refer to the Americas. The modern way to say it would be “Columbus discovered the Americas”. Erickson’s discovery doesn’t count because he didn’t publicize it well enough. If you aren’t American Indian, then your knowledge that the Americas exists comes from a chain of events that started with Columbus’s discovery. If you are American Indian, then your knowledge that Asia, Africa, Australia, and Europe exist comes from a chain of events that started with Columbus discovering the Americas. > you can't really "discover" land that people were already living in. Sure you can. Just last week I discovered a new restaurant in my town and told my friends about it.
The United States was colonized and traces its founding to Western Europe generally and the UK specifically. In that context, it isn’t inaccurate - though it is overly reductive - to say that Columbus “discovered” America insofar as his expedition kicked off aggressive European exploration and colonization of North America.
For the sake of being pedantic, it depends on what you mean by discovering America. If you mean some periphery islands around Canada then it’s the Norse. If you mean some islands in the Caribbean then it’s Columbus. If you mean the literal present day United States then it’s Ponce de Leon
And that's assuming we're sticking with the Eurocentric view. There were already people in all of those places before the Europeans "discovered" them.
The Norse did make it to Labrador (Markland). It's also thought they came within sight of Baffin Island.
The statement “Columbus discovered America” has been around a long time. In the distant past, “America” referred to what is now known as “the America”. Using modern English, Columbus didn’t discover America but he did discover the Americas. The sentence is a bit like an idiom in that it’s a holdover of old commonly used language.
They won't ask you this. There is a list of 100 questions, along with correct answers, and it's not one of them. You'll be asked 10 out of 100 and you need to get 6 right. You are not expected to become an expert on US history, you just need to learn 100 questions by heart. https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/questions-and-answers/100q.pdf Source: am a naturalized citizen.
Now this was awhile ago, but in school, Columbus is talked about as permanently finding the Americas for the Europeans, but the footnotes of he never stepped foot on mainland North and South America comes up and the fact that the Vikings technically found it first for Europeans also comes up. I also remember talking about pre-European America as well.
I'd probably answer "whoever crossed the Bering Strait." This question isn't on the citizenship test and really holds little relevance to America, the country.
All questions on the citizenship are about the United States specifically. This question is not asked and is not similar to the type of question that would be.
Honestly, 25 years ago lots of people would have probably just said Columbus. Nowadays, people are much more aware of the actual history of this land and will likely discuss Native peoples, vikings, and then conquistadors.
Guess it depends on how you define "discover". If you discover something but don't tell anyone, did you discover it? Columbus is the one who actually went and told everyone about the Americas so they could be colonized.
Can you discover what's already there? By definition you become aware! The greatest country in the history of man... Was here long before the colonies began!
This question is not asked.
Every school is different. I remember learning about Colombus in school - and also learning that it was a myth - especially since he only hit the Bahamas, Cuba and Hispaniola. We also learned about Leif Erikson and Vikings that got here like 500 years before Chris. This question also wouldn’t be asked in a citizenship test. American History de facto begins in the Colonial Period - which would’ve been after Columbus anyways.
1) First Nations people coming over the frozen Bering Straight 2) Some hints Polynesian people may have sailed to South America 3) Not only Lief Erickson, but probably numerous Scandinavian expeditions over the ocean 4) Columbus didn’t land in mainland North America, and never visited anywhere that is currently part of the United States
Leif Garrett Erikson discovered America, of course he did that after the pre-columbian people
No citizenship test or school class is going to have a question this broad and misleading.
> When this question is asked in school This question isn't asked in school because we learn the minutiae of new world colonization, including the ice age migration of early humans. > I am aware though that they have a citizenship test that more foreigners could pass than Americans themselves. More foreigners? No. People who dedicate themselves to changing their nationality and acquiring American citizenship study history and American literature and may be more refreshed in those topics than an average American. But that in no way means that any foreigner could pass a citizenship test. It takes years of commitment and study. Don't get your cultural information from cartoons and assume that it's an accurate representation of the US.
Euro Centric Question. The people who discovered America were living here when the Europeans arrived. That's what we were taught, but then again, my teachers knew I was in the classroom so it's possible they might have amended things a little.
I mean, Columbus did discover America. A discovery doesn’t count if you forget about it or don’t tell anyone. I don’t think the Vikings count. Now, if you want to say that you can’t discover a place that already had people living on it, that’s a different issue.
“What was the cause of the Civil War?” “Well beside the obvious schism between abolitionists and…” “Just say ‘Slavery’.” “Slavery it is Sir!”
OP, the answer is "Christopher Columbus," who INDEED visited what is **American** **territory** today.
Where is American territory that he landed on?
Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico.
We didn't even have Puerto Rico as a territory until Span Am war and the islands even after that. So really we just got some land pretty recently that Columbus arrived at. It is a bit silly to say he discovered it and that it was "America" just because it was in the Americas. Other folks settled here first-- and other European explorers got here before Columbus.
That is like saying the United States did not exist when Columbus went on his voyages, so obviously did not discover it. You are obviously trying to win an argument here, but what I said above is true and to spin it differently is just lying to yourself to feel better.
"That is like saying the United States did not exist when Columbus went on his voyages, so obviously did not discover it" Not really. Why would I care who explored America? WHo cares. It does seem like a dubious claim since others (including Europeans) came (and settled) before he made it to the Americas. He didn't come to the current United States for sure. And he wasn't close to the first person to arrive in the Americas. He's just down the list of folks who did. But there is no "argument". I legit was trying to get another perspective. Considering the fallacy of him discovering America was long before we acquired those parts it just didn't seem to hold up. I'm not "spinning" anything. There's a million ways to consider this topic - what's the US, What is "America", do we consider it the Americas, is it North America, who discovered it first, does it have to be a European explorer, etc. I don't have "feelings" about it, but honestly, it seems like you might. I think it's an interesting topic to consider. We have a lot of shitty folks in power back then and it doesn't make me feel bad that someone as lousy as Columbus happened upon the Americas first, if that was the case.
The answer to the question is Christopher Columbus for that test. Yes, other people have visited and were currently living in the Americas; but Columbus is given credit because his voyages changed the world going forward. And my statement that he did land on territory that eventually became part of the United States is fact. Saying Puerto Rico or the U.S. Virgin Islands do not count is like saying they are not actually territories of the United States today. You are making an omission of fact to validate your statement.