Author Topic: The teaching of History at Public Schools.  (Read 654 times)

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33831
The teaching of History at Public Schools.
« on: September 08, 2020, 08:26:00 AM »
Whether there will be a public enquiry into either of the dual national crises of Covid and Brexit is debatable. No doubt the antiLabour Archbishop of Canterbury.....notably silent since that incursion into influencing the vote will urge reconciliation to save the skins of his fellow old etonians.

But we can have our own enquiry which must, if we have it, include the question, who did those responsible think they were, and who did they think we were. To wit the spotlight must fall on their history and citizenship education.

First then do posters recall how their own history teaching make them feel about themselves and their country.

I recall top nationhood, a ruling class, a chiefly political history and the quintessential oddness and eccentricity of Europeans and their rulers.

Harrowby Hall

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5057
Re: The teaching of History at Public Schools.
« Reply #1 on: September 08, 2020, 09:55:06 AM »
I was given the choice of either History or Geography for GCE "O" level. I chose Geography, which I perceived to be more factual and less cluttered than History.  I was pleased with the mark that I eventually received (67%).

I only caught a smll part of Lucy Worsley's BBC2 programme on Elizabeth I and the Spanish Amada. Did I hear rightly? Elizabeth made her famous speech about having the "heart and stomach of a man" about 30 years after her death?

Certainly, Lucy Worsley gives me the impression that what we believe to be history is too often a fabrication. The "Wars of the Roses" was a term invented by Sir Walter Scott, and the disputes involved southern England based families with little connection (other than family name) with counties with which we now associate bloody conflict.
Does Magna Carta mean nothing to you? Did she die in vain?

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33831
Re: The teaching of History at Public Schools.
« Reply #2 on: September 08, 2020, 10:01:29 AM »
I was given the choice of either History or Geography for GCE "O" level. I chose Geography, which I perceived to be more factual and less cluttered than History.  I was pleased with the mark that I eventually received (67%).

I only caught a smll part of Lucy Worsley's BBC2 programme on Elizabeth I and the Spanish Amada. Did I hear rightly? Elizabeth made her famous speech about having the "heart and stomach of a man" about 30 years after her death?

Certainly, Lucy Worsley gives me the impression that what we believe to be history is too often a fabrication. The "Wars of the Roses" was a term invented by Sir Walter Scott, and the disputes involved southern England based families with little connection (other than family name) with counties with which we now associate bloody conflict.
I cannot answer queries about her historical view but I understand she was educated in both private and state schools.

jeremyp

  • Admin Support
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33307
  • Blurb
    • Sincere Flattery: A blog about computing
Re: The teaching of History at Public Schools.
« Reply #3 on: September 08, 2020, 01:39:41 PM »
Certainly, Lucy Worsley gives me the impression that what we believe to be history is too often a fabrication. The "Wars of the Roses" was a term invented by Sir Walter Scott, and the disputes involved southern England based families with little connection (other than family name) with counties with which we now associate bloody conflict.
The history of the Wars of the Roses isn't a fabrication, even though the name was coined by Sir Walter Scott. It was a very bloody period and disastrous for England no matter what you call it.
This post and all of JeremyP's posts words certified 100% divinely inspired* -- signed God.
*Platinum infallibility package, terms and conditions may apply

Harrowby Hall

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5057
Re: The teaching of History at Public Schools.
« Reply #4 on: September 08, 2020, 02:48:10 PM »
The history of the Wars of the Roses isn't a fabrication, even though the name was coined by Sir Walter Scott. It was a very bloody period and disastrous for England no matter what you call it.

This I do not dispute, but our perception of the events during this period (due to Scott's invention) is that they were somewhat localised.

Quote from: Vlad
I cannot answer queries about her historical view but I understand she was educated in both private and state schools.
This is indeed the case. And at Oxford (BA) and Sussex (DPhil).
Does Magna Carta mean nothing to you? Did she die in vain?

jeremyp

  • Admin Support
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33307
  • Blurb
    • Sincere Flattery: A blog about computing
Re: The teaching of History at Public Schools.
« Reply #5 on: September 09, 2020, 04:37:52 PM »
This I do not dispute, but our perception of the events during this period (due to Scott's invention) is that they were somewhat localised.
I don't know that I ever had the perception that it was a localised war. I know the I once thought it was a war between two factions - the Lancastrians and the Yorkists - for the English throne. That is, in itself, also wrong, or grossly simplified, but I always thought of it as a civil war for the whole of England.
This post and all of JeremyP's posts words certified 100% divinely inspired* -- signed God.
*Platinum infallibility package, terms and conditions may apply