As society discusses American Literature, the beginning of it all begins with the world’s native ancestors. World history has developed from over hundreds of years. Thanks to Native Americans, history began with them as they developed these lands culturally. Numerous stories with Native Americans have contributed to the development of the early years. While other important historian figures contributed to societal history with their written perspectives, a famous early explorer seemed to cause a little confusion in history when writing his side of the story. Englishman, John Smith, came to America to seek greater opportunities on this promising land. Smith encountered many journeys and roles as he engaged in his new life. From freedom, discovery,
…show more content…
Nevertheless, researching and comparing John Smith’s documents does not mirror the actual truth. Smith’s truth has been fabricated with certain details that are inaccurate because of assumptions and false witnessing stated in his exploration. Journal critic, Alexander Brown, writes an article to address John Smith’s mistakes and reasons for stating false information in writing his documents. Brown says, “He was certainly incapable of writing correct history where he was personally interested, and after he left Virginia he evidently knew no more of the facts than the generality in England” (1006-10). Brown concludes that John Smith predictions in The General History of Virginia were not written as “selfish motives”, but to stretch the truth about what he encountered in early Virginia (1006-10). Smith had no way of knowing what was occurring in Virginia, which resulted in him writing incorrect information about that period. The General History of Virginia is an interesting but falsified, adventurous tale of John Smith’s exploration coming into America. “Many of these details come to us only through Smith’s own at times, most of them penned long after the events” (58). Wayne Franklin, an English professor from the University of Connecticut, discusses Smith’s written events of his timeline initially
Nevertheless, researching and comparing John Smith’s documents does not mirror the actual truth. Smith’s truth has been fabricated with certain details that are inaccurate because of assumptions and false witnessing stated in his exploration. Journal critic, Alexander Brown, writes an article to address John Smith’s mistakes and reasons for stating false information in writing his documents. Brown says, “He was certainly incapable of writing correct history where he was personally interested, and after he left Virginia he evidently knew no more of the facts than the generality in England” (1006-10). Brown concludes that John Smith predictions in The General History of Virginia were not written as “selfish motives”, but to stretch the truth about what he encountered in early Virginia (1006-10). Smith had no way of knowing what was occurring in Virginia, which resulted in him writing incorrect information about that period. The General History of Virginia is an interesting but falsified, adventurous tale of John Smith’s exploration coming into America. “Many of these details come to us only through Smith’s own at times, most of them penned long after the events” (58). Wayne Franklin, an English professor from the University of Connecticut, discusses Smith’s written events of his timeline initially