heathenhistory.co.uk

No school subject is more contentious than history. This is because of its link to politics and how we view ourselves. The last politician to really try to impose his view on school history was Michael Gove in Coalition Government (2010 – 2015).  Equally, Jeremy Corbyn has suggested that schools should teach more about the role and legacy of the British Empire.

Yet, despite political interference, in British schools history departments are currently broadly free to teach what they want, in the way they want, using the materials that they want (the one exception is that we are required to teach the Holocaust). Underpinning all this of course are the questions – what is the role of history in the curriculum / who should decide what is taught? There is nothing new in this. The image on the left reflects a view as early as 1936 that schools history was whitewashed.

It might not surprise you that I have archived  old textbooks. They show a shocking change in how issues such as the British Empire, the abolition of slavery and the causes of First World War have been  presented over the last hundred years. A thread that runs through them is the omission of Irish history.

What is taught, what is omitted, and what materials are used is ever-changing. Something for us to discuss (carefully) in History Society.

Mr Kydd.

All,

If you click here you will get to the Daily Mail’s reporting of David Starkey’s suggestion that  Remembrance Sunday has become a ‘crazy religious ritual’ in which people had to prove they were thinking of the war dead.

Two things are very predictable here;

1. David Starkey has a long track record of deliberately saying controversial things (click here for example for a discussion an earlier history society had about his comments on the 2011 riots – that was heated).
2. The Daily Mail was always going to be outraged.

I am posting this not to make a judgement Starkey’s views (you can do that for yourselves), but rather to reflect on the question – why should we care what Starkey thinks? Why should we seek the views of a man who is after all an Early Modern specialist any more than any other academic ? We might also like to ask if quoting twitter responses is what journalism looks like in 2019?

Two questions.

1. Is Starkey right?
2. What does this latest Starkey spat (or indeed any other you care to pick) say about the role of the historian is the age of celebrity?

Have a think.

Mr Kydd.