I'm inclined to agree with TB on this one--to a point (see my response to Andrew, below). We study the Greek, Roman and European civilizations more intensely than the Arab, Persian, Indian or Chinese because they have more relevance to our own and to contemporaty history than those others. This is not a slam to those cultures, it's just common sense. Latin American history, although rich and varied, is rarely studied by anyone simply because it had little effect on the rest of the modern world, with the exception of Spain.

I also agree that this effort to make the teaching of history more ecumenical is being carried to extremes, but I also think of it as a reaction to the myopia of the past, and the pendulum will eventually swing back, especially as the practical need for a history which addresses modern concerns re-asserts itself.

I do believe that history should not be used as a mechanism to indoctrinate school children on current political fads, or long-established prejudices obsolete either. If there's one thing a study of history should convince us of, is that good guys are few and far between, and there's plenty of blame to pass out for every one of the participants.