Plantagenet Correct Usage?
Julie Brautigan
I need to know (for some verse I wrote) if Richard III and his cousins
on both sides can be properly referred to as of "the Plantagenet line"?
Or would at this point in time (as if the verse was written in the late
15th century) would the two be referred to as strictly Lancastrian and
Yorkists?
Thanks,
Julie
D. Spencer Hines
"Plantaginet" in 1460 (yes, spelled that way). Vide infra
Richard III's mother, Cecily Neville, was a granddaughter of John of
Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster ---- through the Beaufort line.
"The Plantagenet line" is a rather broad and sloppy phrase ---- but
poetic, I suppose.
If it fits the meter and parses it's not objectionable from a historical
standpoint ---- in a poem ---- where some latitude in specificity is
permissible.
The full nine yards on _Plantagenet_.
----
"Plantagenet." This matter comes up regularly in both
soc.genealogy.medieval and soc.history.medieval, as well as in
alt.talk.royalty.
We usually hit it a glancing blow, questions are asked --- some
tentative, partial, answers are given. Some stock quotations from the
_Complete Peerage_ are trotted out. Misimpressions are created and
locked in and we move on. Typical newsgroup behaviour. Similar to a
singles bar, with hard rock drowning out any serious conversations ----
as the body exchange rolls on.
Gentle Readers and Serious Scholars deserve a more complete explanation.
So, in the spirit of Henry V [1387-1422] at Harfleur, "Once more unto
the breach, dear friends, once more; Or close up the wall with our
English dead!" [Henry V, III, i, 1-2.] I humbly provide the following
explanation of the History of 'Plantagenet' as a sobriquet transformed
into a surrogate surname. [N.B. Henry V is the 7th great-grandson of
Geoffroi V 'le Bel', comte d'Anjou et Maine.]
Geoffrey V 'The Fair' [1113-1151] Count of Anjou and Maine was Duke of
Normandy 1144-1150. Plantagenet, used as a surname, is commonly applied
to members of the Royal House of England between 1154 and 1485. Members
of that house were descended from the union between Geoffrey, Count of
Anjou and Maine, and the Empress Matilda, [1102-1167] daughter of the
English King, Henry I 'Beauclerc' [1068-1135] --- he who supposedly died
from a "surfeit of lampreys."
Although the practice is well-established, it has little historical
justification. The name Plantagenet seems to have originated as a
sobriquet or nickname for Count Geoffrey. It has variously been
explained as referring to his practice of wearing a sprig or branch of
yellow broom (Latin: [planta] genista; Old French: plante genêt in his
helm, or more probably to his habit of planting brooms to improve his
hunting cover. [N.B. Birds will nest under the small broom bushes or
shrubs and hunters may hide behind them.]
"Plantagenet" was not, by any means, a hereditary surname and Geoffrey's
progeny remained without one for more than 300 years, although surnames
became common outside the Royal Family.
Henry II 'Curtmantle' FitzEmpress [1133-1189] [son of Geoffrey and
Matilda The Empress] and his own sons, Richard I and John I, are now
generally styled by historians as the Angevin (from Anjou) kings. For
want of a better name, their successors, notably Henry III, Edward I,
Edward II, Edward III, and Richard II are still described as
Plantagenets.
Henry IV, Henry V and Henry VI may properly be called the House of
Lancaster; while Edward IV, Edward V and Richard III constitute the
monarchs of the House of York. Edward V, of course, is a quite
special case who hardly "reigned" as king and reportedly died in the
Tower of London at 12, one of the two 'Princes in the Tower.'
The first official use of the surname Plantagenet by any descendant of
Count Geoffrey was in 1460, when Richard, 3rd Duke of York [1411-1460],
claimed the throne in the name of "Richard Plantaginet." [N.B. Yes,
there was no standard spelling in English in 1460.]
Richard, 3rd Duke of York, was Protector of England, Earl of March and
Ulster, and Earl of Cambridge. His attempts to gain power for his House
of York, coupled with many other personal, dynastic and historical
factors, precipitated the Wars of the Roses (1455-1485). The House of
York was later identified with the White Rose and the House of Lancaster
with the Red Rose. As noted above, Richard, 3rd Duke of York, was the
first to adopt the surname of Plantagenet.
The legitimate male issue of Count Geoffrey and Matilda The Empress
became extinct with the death, in 1499, of Edward, [1475-1499] 18th Earl
of Warwick, grandson of Richard, 3rd Duke of York. He was the son of
George [1449-1478], Duke of Clarence, who allegedly met his end in the
Tower of London as did his son, but George was supposedly drowned in the
famous butt of Malmsey. The Madeira Wine, "Duke of Clarence" is named
after this event. It is quite palatable, with good body and a bit of a
nose.
Henry VII resented Edward, 18th Earl of Warwick's proximity to the
throne and he was executed at the Tower of London on 28 Nov 1499 .
Edward was imprisoned for many years and not allowed to have a tutor,
according to some accounts. Therefore, Henry VII allegedly kept him
ignorant and uneducated----by design. Clever fellow --- and
Machiavellian Prince indeed --- was that Henry Tudor.
Vide the second edition of George Edward Cokayne's [1825-1911] _The
Complete Peerage of England, Scotland, Ireland, Great Britain and the
United Kingdom, Extant, Extinct or Dormant_; Microprint Edition
(half-size in 6 volumes, condensed from 13); 26 cm; LOC CS421 .C7 1982;
Dewey # 929.7/2 19; ISBN (set) 0904387828; Nobility---British Isles
[First Edition: (1887-1898); Second Edition (1910-1959). New York,
Saint Martin's Press, 1984, [Reprinted from the British (Alan Sutton
Publishing, Ltd.) version] 13 volumes in 6; also, previously,
Gloucester: A. Sutton, 1982 (also 13 v. in 6; 26 cm)
[The Sutton version is a reprint of the Second Edition], Volume I
(originally published in 1910), p. 183, note (c):
"It is much to be wished that the surname "Plantagenet," which, since
the time of Charles II, has been freely given to all the descendants of
Geoffrey of Anjou, had some historical basis which would justify its
use, for it forms a most convenient method of referring to the Edwardian
kings and their numerous descendants. The fact is, however, as has been
pointed out by Sir James Ramsay and other writers of our day, that the
name, although a personal emblem [N.B. Latin *planta genista* =
broom --- DSH] of the aforesaid Geoffrey, was never borne by any of his
descendants before Richard Plantagenet, Duke of York (father of Edward
IV), [N.B. and also of Richard III --- DSH] who assumed it, apparently
about 1448. V.G."
"V.G." is Vicary Gibbs, one of the Editors of the Second Edition of the
Complete Peerage.
This is obviously a quite complex and multi-faceted account ---- subject
to differing interpretations and shadings. Corrections, additions and
clarifications are most welcome and should be sent to the author.
--
Copyright © 2000-2001 by D. Spencer Hines, All Rights Reserved
"The final happiness of man consists in the contemplation of truth....
This is sought for its own sake, and is directed to no other end beyond
itself." Saint Thomas Aquinas, [1224/5-1274] "Summa Contra Gentiles"
[c.1258-1264]
Vires et Honor.
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
DSH
--
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
"Much have I travelled in the realms of gold, And many goodly states and
kingdoms seen; Round many western islands have I been, Which bards in
fealty to Apollo hold." -- John Keats [1795-1821] -- Poems [1817] -- "On
First Looking Into Chapman's Homer"
All replies to the newsgroup please. Thank you kindly.
All original material contained herein is copyright and property of the
author. It may be quoted only in discussions on this forum and with an
attribution to the author, unless permission is otherwise expressly
given, in writing.
Vires et Honor.
"Julie Brautigan" <j...@uwm.edu> wrote in message
news:3B38BB23...@uwm.edu...
Mitchell Holman
}
}Henry VII resented Edward, 18th Earl of Warwick's proximity to the
}throne and he was executed at the Tower of London on 28 Nov 1499 .
}Edward was imprisoned for many years and not allowed to have a tutor,
}according to some accounts. Therefore, Henry VII allegedly kept him
}ignorant and uneducated----by design. Clever fellow --- and
}Machiavellian Prince indeed --- was that Henry Tudor.
}
What was Tudor's justification for this? I understand
his motive, given the speed with which he tracked down
and executed all the York family members he could find.
But surely he needed to have a pretext, if not a trial.
D. Spencer Hines
In a phrase ---- "The Threat of Continuing Yorkist Plots."
Have you ever heard of Perkin Warbeck and Lambert Simnel?
If not, here's a starter source, newly edited by the author:
From: D. Spencer Hines (D._Spence...@aya.yale.edu)
Subject: Lambert Simnel, Perkin Warbeck & Laura V. Blanchard
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval, soc.history.medieval
Date: 2000/01/03
As many of us know, Laura V. Blanchard, alias Salome, alias Mrs.
Doubtfire, alias the Philadelphia Groupie, alias Jade Fox --- has a deep
and enduring fixation with and on King Richard III of England.
It's not necrophilia --- so forget about that.
That is just fine, safe and secure --- without Real World entanglements,
alarums and excursions --- except those she makes on pilgrimage to
various Richard III historical sites in England.
Richard was born in 1452 and died in 1485 at the Battle of Bosworth
Field --- a rare and noble flower, fallen in the mature flush of his
young manhood. Laura thinks he's cute.
Yet, Laura V. extends her "Mini-Period of Interest" to 1487.
Why?
Lambert Simnel and His Wacko Yorkist Rebellion --- "An Extension". The
Last Hurrah?
Who the Hell Was Lambert Simnel? Good For A Song Title.
Lambert Simnel [circa 1475-1535] --- incompetent that he was ---
pretended to be Edward [1475-1499 Executed, Tower Hill] 18th Earl of
Warwick [Son of George, Duke of Clarence --- he who was allegedly
drowned in the Malmsey Butt]. --- Lambert was routed at Stoke on 16 June
1487. His supporters were either killed or pardoned. Lambert at least
survived after his folly as a Yorkist stooge and was put to work as a
scullery boy, where he supposedly did some useful work, in Henry VII and
Henry VIII's kitchens --- and lived until 1535.
Perkin Warbeck [1474?-1499] was another Yorkist Pretender with dreams of
glory. He claimed to be Richard, Duke of York. ["Richard IV"
[1473-1483?] --- the Younger Prince in the Tower] Perkin, was a total
incompetent and was hanged in 1499 after twice trying to escape from the
Tower. No James Bond was he. Decidedly an "unsuccessful Warbeck."
Perkin's Folly also led directly to the death of the Real Edward, Earl
of Warwick. Henry VII saw an excellent opportunity to remove him from
the chessboard --- as he had become a nuisance.
It would be more difficult for a Yorkist Pogueish Pretender [YPP] to say
he was Edward, Earl of Warwick, if everyone knew that the Real Earl of
Warwick was dead.
Clever chap that Henry Tudor [Henry VII]. He quickly grasped these
delicate matters of Royal Statecraft.
The legitimate agnatic issue of Geoffrey, Count of Anjou and Maine
(1113-1151) and Empress Matilda (1103-1167), the Plantagenet line,
became extinct with Edward, 18th Earl of Warwick's death in 1499.
Henry VII resented Edward's proximity to the throne and he was executed.
He was imprisoned for many years and not allowed to have a tutor,
according to several accounts. Therefore, the clear implication is that
Henry VII kept him ignorant and uneducated --- by design. Clever fellow
that Henry Tudor. Today he would confine him to an American Public High
School --- and leave him to rot mentally and physically.
One can clearly see, from this salient example, why the disciplines of
Genealogy, Prosopography and History are conjoined at the hip. Let no
man, nor woman, cast them asunder.
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas
Parentibus Caris Pius Filius
Copyright © 1999-2000-2001 --- D. Spencer Hines --- All Rights Reserved
--
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
"The final happiness of man consists in the contemplation of truth....
This is sought for its own sake, and is directed to no other end beyond
itself." Saint Thomas Aquinas, [1224/5-1274] "Summa Contra Gentiles"
[c.1258-1264]
--
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
"Much have I travelled in the realms of gold, And many goodly states and
kingdoms seen; Round many western islands have I been, Which bards in
fealty to Apollo hold." -- John Keats [1795-1821] -- Poems [1817] -- "On
First Looking Into Chapman's Homer"
All replies to the newsgroup please. Thank you kindly.
All original material contained herein is copyright and property of the
author. It may be quoted only in discussions on this forum and with an
attribution to the author, unless permission is otherwise expressly
given, in writing.
Vires et Honor.
"Mitchell Holman" <ta2...@airmail.net> wrote in message
news:D0FBF80FC025304D.DB73FF9B...@lp.airnews.net..
.
D. Spencer Hines
Yes, here's a bit more on that with due *primary* credit to CP, Leo van
de Pas and William Addams Reitwiesner:
Margaret of Salisbury was executed with appalling barbarity, actually at
67 3/4 rather than 68 (reportedly born 14 Aug 1473), so she was three
months short of her 68th birthday at death. [N.B. Women don't like to be
prematurely moved up to the next one do they? <g> ---- DSH]:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"The description of her death I have is:
On 12 May 1539 she was, without a trial, attainted by Act of Parliament,
whereby all her honours were forfeited. On 28 May 1541 she was beheaded
in the Tower. Chapuys, writing to Queen Mary of Hungary, spoke of her
"very strange and lamentable execution, "which took place "at the Tower
in the presence of the Lord Mayor of London and about 150 persons more".
In the absence of the executioner, "a wretched and blundering youth was
chosen, who literally hacked her head and shoulders to pieces in the
most pitiful manner".
[N.B. An excellent example of why we should *avoid* the company and
*not* trust the competence of wretched and blundering youths, i.e., the
pimply-faced-kids of our day ---- lesser breeds without the law ----
uneducated and ignorant, yet arrogant ---- youths. <g> HOWEVER, there
is *another* story and the youthful executioner MAY not have been at
fault. Stay tuned. ---- DSH]
The Complete Peerage, Volume XI pages 399, 400, 401 and 402. This is
the entry for Margaret as Countess of Salisbury. The actual description
(by Chapuys) is in a footnote on page 401. [and 402 ---- DSH]
Apparently her son, Cardinal Reginald Pole, was at one stage one vote
off from becoming Pope.... Margaret, Countess of Salisbury, is also an
ancestor of Prince William of Wales."
Leo van de Pas, soc.genealogy.medieval 22 May 1999.
--------------------
According to William Addams Reitwiesner, as I recall, she is the last
surviving patrilineal legitimate descendant of Richard, 3rd Duke of
York. But, I am not speaking for him on that score. He is quite
capable of doing that himself.
CP says:
"She was the last surviving member of the great royal House of Anjou,
now usually known as the Plantagenets." XI:402
Sacrebleu et Mon Dieu ---- The Last Plantagenet!
--------
These were cruel times and Henry VIII did not fool around.
Elizabeth I, his daughter, was perhaps more lenient to begin with and
paid a price for it in turbulence and instability throughout the
realm ---- at a most hazardous time. She learned.
'Treason' should be dealt with swiftly and efficiently. Strong
'successful' authoritarian leaders who *survive* realise that. Think of
Fidel Castro and Saddam Hussein, for two contemporary examples ---- not
democrats or nice guys ---- but survivors.
I like the way Henry V handled the Southampton Plot of Cambridge, Scroop
and Grey ---- no mucking about ---- once the evidence was firmly in
hand.
Deus Vult.
Cheers,
Spencer
--
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
"Much have I travelled in the realms of gold, And many goodly states and
kingdoms seen; Round many western islands have I been, Which bards in
fealty to Apollo hold." -- John Keats [1795-1821] -- Poems [1817] -- "On
First Looking Into Chapman's Homer"
All replies to the newsgroup please. Thank you kindly.
All original material contained herein is copyright and property of the
author. It may be quoted only in discussions on this forum and with an
attribution to the author, unless permission is otherwise expressly
given, in writing.
Vires et Honor.
"Rosie Bevan" <cbe...@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
news:04fe01c0fe93$89419c80$0101a8c0@rosie...
| Another outstanding post, Spencer. You really are on form this week.
|
| Tudor insecurity continued in the next generation when Henry VIII
| executed the Poles with great barbarity -even poor old granny
| Margaret Pole aged 68, who was sister of Edward, and her family.
|
| Cheers
|
| Rosie
D. Spencer Hines
"Lord Herbert of Cherbury relates that he was assured by a person of
great quality that she [Margaret, Countess of Salisbury ---- DSH]
refused to lay her head on the block, saying: "So should traitors do,
and I am none: neither did it serve that the Executioner told her it
was the fashion; so turning her gray head every way, shee bid him, if he
would have her head, to get it as he could: So that he was constrained
to fetch it off slovenly" (_Life and Raigne of King Henry the Eighth_,
1649, p. 468). This reads like a later legend, invented to account for
the way in which the execution was bungled." CP XI:402
Marvellous language ---- "So that he was constrained to fetch it off
slovenly..." I love it.
BUT ---- "Who ya gonna believe?" <g>
Was the "wretched and blundering youth" at fault ---- or was the
countess herself to blame?
He Said, She Said ---- To The Max. : )
Mitchell Holman
That is all very nice, but it didn't answer the question.
What pretext did Henry VII use to execute George's son
without a trial?
D. Spencer Hines
Look up Bills of Attainder.
--
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
"Much have I travelled in the realms of gold, And many goodly states and
kingdoms seen; Round many western islands have I been, Which bards in
fealty to Apollo hold." -- John Keats [1795-1821] -- Poems [1817] -- "On
First Looking Into Chapman's Homer"
All replies to the newsgroup please. Thank you kindly.
All original material contained herein is copyright and property of the
author. It may be quoted only in discussions on this forum and with an
attribution to the author, unless permission is otherwise expressly
given, in writing.
Vires et Honor.
"Mitchell Holman" <ta2...@airmail.net> wrote in message
news:6D5DA401BEDC5582.C45A71B7...@lp.airnews.net..
.
David Mowbray
<D._Spence...@aya.yale.edu> writes
<big snip>
>Lambert Simnel [circa 1475-1535] --- incompetent that he was ---
>pretended to be Edward [1475-1499 Executed, Tower Hill] 18th Earl of
>Warwick [Son of George, Duke of Clarence --- he who was allegedly
>drowned in the Malmsey Butt]. --- Lambert was routed at Stoke on 16 June
>1487. His supporters were either killed or pardoned. Lambert at least
>survived after his folly as a Yorkist stooge and was put to work as a
>scullery boy, where he supposedly did some useful work, in Henry VII and
>Henry VIII's kitchens --- and lived until 1535.
Just to clarify matters, that should be East Stoke, a village just south
of Newark in Nottinghamshire and not to be confused with the several
other places in England with Stoke in their name.
Adjacent to River Trent, the blood from the battle is said to have
flowed into the river.
--
David Mowbray | Mowbray One-Name Study (G.o.ONS 986). Also seeking |
Cheltenham, UK | HERBERT (GLS); TANK (UK) + SCHNEIDER in WUE/GER |
e-mail: mow...@one-name.org
web page: http://www.mowfam.freeserve.co.uk
mailing list: see web page for link to Mow...@yahoo.com
D. Spencer Hines
However, the *battle* is known to History as the Battle of Stoke, *not*
the 'Battle of East Stoke'.
Fought on 16 June 1487, it led to the death of Lincoln, who had led the
rebellion against Henry VII.
This was reportedly the last occasion upon which a reigning King of
England was required to take the field in person as the
Commander-in-Chief and the field commander, against a rival claimant to
his throne.
So, the Battle of Stoke is a distinct watershed in that respect.
Several further grace notes on Lambert Simnel. He was actually the
ten-year-old son of an Oxford carpenter, who posed as Edward
['Plantagenet'], Earl of Warwick.
This was rather foolish, because Edward was still alive at the time, a
twelve-year-old boy ---- held prisoner in the Tower ---- and could be
produced and displayed by Henry VII, whenever he so wished.
However, foolish as all this may look to us in retrospect ---- from the
safe and secure perspective of over 500 years ---- Lambert Simnel was a
real and present threat to Henry Tudor's throne. He was actually
crowned as King Edward VI in Dublin, by the Anglo-Irish, on 24 May 1487.
--
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
"Much have I travelled in the realms of gold, And many goodly states and
kingdoms seen; Round many western islands have I been, Which bards in
fealty to Apollo hold." -- John Keats [1795-1821] -- Poems [1817] -- "On
First Looking Into Chapman's Homer"
All replies to the newsgroup please. Thank you kindly.
All original material contained herein is copyright and property of the
author. It may be quoted only in discussions on this forum and with an
attribution to the author, unless permission is otherwise expressly
given, in writing.
Vires et Honor.
"David Mowbray" <da...@mowfam.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:vULn3AAc...@mowfam.freeserve.co.uk...
D. Spencer Hines
I just transmitted it.
Cheers,
--
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
"Much have I travelled in the realms of gold, And many goodly states and
kingdoms seen; Round many western islands have I been, Which bards in
fealty to Apollo hold." -- John Keats [1795-1821] -- Poems [1817] -- "On
First Looking Into Chapman's Homer"
All replies to the newsgroup please. Thank you kindly.
All original material contained herein is copyright and property of the
author. It may be quoted only in discussions on this forum and with an
attribution to the author, unless permission is otherwise expressly
given, in writing.
Vires et Honor.
"Rosie Bevan" <cbe...@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
news:010301c0ff67$eb4bc660$0101a8c0@rosie...
| Ah! yes. I misunderstood. Spencer, can you teach this Brit more
history and
| clarify?
|
| Cheers
|
| Rosie
| ----- Original Message -----
| From: "Stewart, Peter" <Peter....@crsrehab.gov.au>
| To: <GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com>
| Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 12:01 PM
| Subject: RE: Plantagenet Correct Usage?
|
| > > -----Original Message-----
| > > From: Leo van de Pas [mailto:leov...@iinet.net.au]
| > > Sent: Thursday, 28 June 2001 9:30
| > > To: GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com
| > > Subject: Re: Plantagenet Correct Usage?
| > >
| > >
| > > Dear Rosie
| > > This is a fascinating subject and many years ago a Josephine
| > > Tey wrote a book "The Daughter of Time". The title comes
| > > from "Truth is the daughter of Time". In it all knowledge
| > > about the two princes is investigated and she comes to the
| > > conclusion that they died (not necessarily murdered I think)
| > > during the reign of Henry VII. For a period her findings were
| > > regarded as acceptable and then I believe a few rumblings
| > > emerged against her findings.
| > > In any case it is a fascinating book to read.
| > > Best wishes
| > > Leo van de Pas
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > > ----- Original Message -----
| > > From: Rosie Bevan <cbe...@xtra.co.nz>
| > > To: <GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com>
| > > Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 5:23 AM
| > > Subject: Re: Plantagenet Correct Usage?
| > >
| > >
| > > > Yet another interesting post, Spencer.
| > > >
| > > > Just curious about a couple of statements.
| > > >
| > > > If Henry VII could produc young Prince Edward, why
| > > > didn't he? AND what sources do you have which indicate
| > > > they were alive during the reign of Henry VII?
| >
| > I assume Spencer was referring to Edward, earl of Warwick and
Salisbury
| > (born Warwick 25 Feb 1475, executed Tower Hill 28 Nov 1499), a
cousin of
| the
| > Princes in the Tower who were killed before Henry VII came to the
throne.
| > Henry Tudor would hardly have produced his brother-in-law, de jure
Edward
| V,
| > even if he had been living.
| >
| > Peter Stewart
D. Spencer Hines
2. *Totally* different Edward.
3. *Not* Edward, Prince of Wales, Duke of Cornwall and Earl of Chester,
Earl of Pembroke ---- son of Edward IV ---- the elder Prince in the
Tower ---- Edward V ---- who probably died in 1483. He would have been
17 in 1487. Lambert Simnell, the ten-year-old, could hardly have
impersonated him. Dates do matter in History. <g>
4. Edward, 18th Earl of Warwick, son of George, Duke of Clarence, elder
brother of Richard III, he of the butt of Malmsey. This Edward was
beheaded on 28 Nov 1499 by Henry VII's order.
5. Why didn't Henry VII produce Edward, Earl of Warwick?
6. Well, the Complete Peerage says he did, briefly, in 1487, during the
Lambert Simnel impersonation. Edward was reportedly taken in procession
to St. Paul's one Sunday, to hear Mass ---- so that he could be seen and
recognised. This may well have been the last time he passed outside the
Tower. [CP XII, Part 2:396 and note d.]
7. Edward, Earl of Warwick ---- and some say Earl of Salisbury,
probably incorrectly ---- did have a supposedly trumped up trial of
sorts before Henry Tudor dispatched him. Edward was
accused of conspiring high treason with a fellow prisoner, Perkin
Warbeck. The Earl of Oxford was appointed Lord High Steward of England
to preside at his trial, of which there is an official report.
8. Henry Tudor's strategy may have been to let Edward languish in
prison, not being educated ---- similar to being imprisoned in many
American High Schools. ---- This would make him obviously unfit to
assume any high-ranking, official duties as he grew older.
9. Then waiting for an opportune moment ---- as dissatisfaction with
Yorkist plots in the realm increased and as Henry Tudor consolidated his
power base, created new centres of power and saw to it that others
withered ---- as he grew his stable of New Men and felt more secure and
ready to call in some IOU's ---- he struck. But he waited 14 years
after Bosworth Field before he liquidated Edward, Earl of Warwick.
10. Smart, wily, clever fellow that Henry Tudor ---- good, tough,
ruthless leader ---- for a Mediaeval King.
11. You know, I think that may be the fundamental problem here, Rosie.
People just can't think like ---- and put themselves inside the heads
of ---- Medieval English Kings and Queens anymore. Slacked-Arsed
Democracy has bred it right out of them. : )
Cheers,
Spencer
--
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
"Much have I travelled in the realms of gold, And many goodly states and
kingdoms seen; Round many western islands have I been, Which bards in
fealty to Apollo hold." -- John Keats [1795-1821] -- Poems [1817] -- "On
First Looking Into Chapman's Homer"
All replies to the newsgroup please. Thank you kindly.
All original material contained herein is copyright and property of the
author. It may be quoted only in discussions on this forum and with an
attribution to the author, unless permission is otherwise expressly
given, in writing.
Vires et Honor.
"Rosie Bevan" <cbe...@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
news:00c101c0ff4f$6b17e040$0101a8c0@rosie...
| Yet another interesting post, Spencer.
|
| Just curious about a couple of statements.
|
| If Henry VII could produce young Prince Edward, why didn't he? AND
| what sources do you have which indicate they were alive during the
| reign of Henry VII?
|
| Cheers
|
| Rosie
| ----- Original Message -----
| From: "D. Spencer Hines" <D._Spence...@aya.yale.edu>
| To: <GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com>
| Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 8:47 AM
| Subject: Re: Plantagenet Correct Usage?
|
|
| > Fair Enough. Thanks for the additional facts.
| >
| > However, the *battle* is known to History as the Battle of Stoke,
| > *not* the 'Battle of East Stoke'.
| >
| > Fought on 16 June 1487, it led to the death of Lincoln, who had led
| > the rebellion against Henry VII.
| >
| > This was reportedly the last occasion upon which a reigning King of
| > England was required to take the field in person as the
| > Commander-in-Chief and the field commander, against a rival claimant
| > to his throne.
| >
| > So, the Battle of Stoke is a distinct watershed in that respect.
| >
| > Several further grace notes on Lambert Simnel. He was actually the
| > ten-year-old son of an Oxford carpenter, who posed as Edward
| > ['Plantagenet'], Earl of Warwick.
| >
| > This was rather foolish, because Edward was still alive at the time,
| > a twelve-year-old boy ---- held prisoner in the Tower ----
| > and could be produced and displayed by Henry VII, whenever
| > he so wished.
| >
| > However, foolish as all this may look to us in retrospect ---- from
| > the safe and secure perspective of over 500 years ----
| > Lambert Simnel was a real and present threat to Henry Tudor's
| > throne. He was actually crowned as King Edward VI in Dublin,
| > by the Anglo-Irish, on 24 May 1487.
| > --
| >
| > D. Spencer Hines
| >
| > Lux et Veritas et Libertas
D. Spencer Hines
Prime Ministers.
So, what the hell does that prove? <g>
--
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
"Much have I travelled in the realms of gold, And many goodly states and
kingdoms seen; Round many western islands have I been, Which bards in
fealty to Apollo hold." -- John Keats [1795-1821] -- Poems [1817] -- "On
First Looking Into Chapman's Homer"
All replies to the newsgroup please. Thank you kindly.
All original material contained herein is copyright and property of the
author. It may be quoted only in discussions on this forum and with an
attribution to the author, unless permission is otherwise expressly
given, in writing.
Vires et Honor.
"Stewart, Peter" <Peter....@crsrehab.gov.au> wrote in message
news:BE9CF8DEAB7ED311B05E...@v003138e.crsrehab.gov.au..
.
| > -----Original Message-----
| > From: D. Spencer Hines [mailto:D._Spence...@aya.yale.edu]
| > Sent: Thursday, 28 June 2001 6:48
| > To: GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com
| > Subject: Re: Plantagenet Correct Usage?
| >
| > <snip>
| > However, foolish as all this may look to us in retrospect ----
| > from the safe and secure perspective of over 500 years ----
| > Lambert Simnel was a real and present threat to Henry
| > Tudor's throne.
|
| Some of Henry VII's actions in extirpating the real Plantagenets might
have
| looked rather foolish even to his contemporaries - given the weak
legality
| of the personal claim he put forward to the throne through his mother,
and
| his avoidance after de facto success of a much stronger claim jure
uxoris,
| his concentration on killing off the agnatic relatives of his wife
could be
| taken as a tacit admission that her legitimacy was suspect after all.
This
| was hardly the best way to bolster the dynastic claims of his
children.
|
| Whatever his command of statecraft, Henry VII remains the greyest man
of all
| English kings for most people, and judged as a ruler perhaps the
greatest
| misfit of all the usurpers or interlopers - largely because he was so
| efficient a bureaucrat, the last quality to be found in most of his
| predeccessors & successors. And then he reigned over a fairly dismal
calm
| before the great renewing cultural storm that blew around his son and
| especially his granddaughter Elizabeth. No wonder the British have
never
| since been too keen on him & his time.
|
| Peter Stewart
|
D. Spencer Hines
Your comments below are quite fascinating ---- and I suspect right on
target. Genealogy is a Major Gateway into the study of Mediaeval
History. Once people understand that they are actually *descended* from
these people in the Mediaeval History books ---- particularly if they
can prove specific lines ---- they perk up their ears ---- and start
reading and listening ---- the smart ones ---- whereas before, as you
say, they probably were just inclined to ignore it.
I see you studied the French Revolution three times. Was there also
lots on the English Reform Movement of the 19th Century ---- the
Chartists ---- Cobden and Bright ---- as well as the Paris Commune and
the Russian Revolution ---- Ramsay MacDonald ---- the General Strike of
1926 ---- Clement Atlee?
Did they spend a fair amount of time on the Fabian Socialists, Beatrice
and Sidney Webb, George Bernard Shaw, et. al.?
Cheers,
Spencer
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rosie Bevan"
Subject: Re: Plantagenet Correct Usage?
| Thank you very much Spencer for your erudite explanation.
|
| 11. You may have a point here, but you can't imagine what you don't
know.
|
| The English education system probably has a lot to answer for. The
school
| curriculum in the sixties and seventies (I won't go into the confused
| political influences behind it) either had an emphasis on Commonwealth
| history or social change and revolution from the Civil War (English)
| onwards. Medieval history was ignored and pushed to the back of the
| cupboard. I am well versed in the French Revolution (which I covered
no less
| than 3 times!). It wasn't until I got to university in New Zealand
that I
| had the chance to study early European/English medieval history.
|
| There is also a problem of ownership. Before the advent of the
internet, not
| many people in the UK had an interest in genealogy, nor an interest in
the
| past. There was little searching for one's roots because there had
been
| little deviation away from them geographically. The class system was
| considered a fairly rigid animal which meant that the liklihood of the
| average person being descended from the ruling classes, was not
something
| one would expect. This means that there was/is not much identification
with
| the Plantagenets, Nevilles, Percys and their scions. When I started
| searching out on my own family history in Delapre Abbey, Northampton,
20
| years ago I never expected or imagined that I would eventually find
any of
| these.
|
| The chances are that as genealogy is becoming more popular in the UK,
more
| people are rediscovering their heritage and hopefully the education
system,
| if it hasn't already done so, will cater for all aspects of British
history.
|
| I would be interested to know what is happening in the UK at present.
|
| Cheers
|
| Rosie
| ----- Original Message -----
| From: "D. Spencer Hines" <D._Spence...@aya.yale.edu>
| To: <GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com>
| Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 12:47 PM
| Subject: Re: Plantagenet Correct Usage?
|
|
D. Spencer Hines
I *do* get the drift.
Saints Preserve Us From "Educators" With an Axe To Grind.
--
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
"Much have I travelled in the realms of gold, And many goodly states and
kingdoms seen; Round many western islands have I been, Which bards in
fealty to Apollo hold." -- John Keats [1795-1821] -- Poems [1817] -- "On
First Looking Into Chapman's Homer"
All replies to the newsgroup please. Thank you kindly.
All original material contained herein is copyright and property of the
author. It may be quoted only in discussions on this forum and with an
attribution to the author, unless permission is otherwise expressly
given, in writing.
Vires et Honor.
"Rosie Bevan" <cbe...@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
news:01a301c0ff83$5a3fc060$0101a8c0@rosie...
| I remember lots on the reform movement of the nineteenth century and
the
| Russian Revolution. The only other 20th century history I recall was
the
| origins of the first World War. But I think you astutely get my drift.
|
| (The reason I studied the French Revolution 3 times was that we moved
to
| different areas. In those days the education curriculum was devised by
local
| government. I don't know whether it still does or whether there is a
| national one.)
D. Spencer Hines
at the Bar of History than they are by the poguenoscenti today.
Hell, they won the Cold War ---- and without triggering World War
III ---- a remarkable achievement.
The naysayers, the mollycoddles and ragamuffins who said we had to
"compromise" with the Soviets and seek a "convergence" of the two
political and economic systems are still in terminal shock, to this day.
Ronald Reagan was too smart to be a really fine actor. As Alfred
Hitchcock put it so well, actors are "cattle" in the main. But he was a
first-rate President of the United States.
Deus Vult.
--
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
"Much have I travelled in the realms of gold, And many goodly states and
kingdoms seen; Round many western islands have I been, Which bards in
fealty to Apollo hold." -- John Keats [1795-1821] -- Poems [1817] -- "On
First Looking Into Chapman's Homer"
All replies to the newsgroup please. Thank you kindly.
All original material contained herein is copyright and property of the
author. It may be quoted only in discussions on this forum and with an
attribution to the author, unless permission is otherwise expressly
given, in writing.
Vires et Honor.
"Stewart, Peter" <Peter....@crsrehab.gov.au> wrote in message
news:BE9CF8DEAB7ED311B05E...@v003138e.crsrehab.gov.au..
.
| > -----Original Message-----
| > From: D. Spencer Hines [mailto:D._Spence...@aya.yale.edu]
| > Sent: Thursday, 28 June 2001 11:38
| > To: GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com
| > Subject: Re: Plantagenet Correct Usage?
| >
| >
| > And today the Brits malign Margaret Thatcher ---- one of
| > their greatest Prime Ministers.
| >
| > So, what the hell does that prove? <g>
|
| I suppose it proves that they are not too keen on her & her time in
power,
| no more than I said about people's attitude to Henry VII - should
anyone be
| regarded with everlasting interest because she or he was a "great"
leader
| for a brief & undistinguished time in a nation's history? At that rate
we
| should all think more indulgently of the mediocre actor Reagan.
|
| Peter Stewart
|
D. Spencer Hines
2. Read Edmund Morris's first-cut biography of Ronald Reagan _Dutch_.
3. Morris is a first-class Historian and biographer ---- Brit.
4. Wait for the Verdict of History.
5. Don't believe this sour-grapes twaddle that the Hard Left continues
to pump out ---- designed to destroy Reagan's place in History ---- and
Thatcher's ---- pure leftist spin.
--
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
"Much have I travelled in the realms of gold, And many goodly states and
kingdoms seen; Round many western islands have I been, Which bards in
fealty to Apollo hold." -- John Keats [1795-1821] -- Poems [1817] -- "On
First Looking Into Chapman's Homer"
All replies to the newsgroup please. Thank you kindly.
All original material contained herein is copyright and property of the
author. It may be quoted only in discussions on this forum and with an
attribution to the author, unless permission is otherwise expressly
given, in writing.
Vires et Honor.
"Stewart, Peter" <Peter....@crsrehab.gov.au> wrote in message
news:BE9CF8DEAB7ED311B05E...@v003138e.crsrehab.gov.au..
.
| > -----Original Message-----
| > From: D. Spencer Hines [mailto:D._Spence...@aya.yale.edu]
| > Sent: Thursday, 28 June 2001 14:42
| > To: GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com
| > Subject: Re: Plantagenet Correct Usage?
| >
| >
| > Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan will both be viewed very
| > differently at the Bar of History than they are by the poguenoscenti
| > today.
| >
| > Hell, they won the Cold War ---- and without triggering World War
| > III ---- a remarkable achievement.
|
| Did they indeed? I thought the Soviet bloc lost it pretty
convincingly, all
| on their ownsome, and might have done so just as quickly without the
help of
| those immortal sages, Thatcher and Reagan (and why not the more subtle
| Mitterand for that matter?), who between them no more predicted the
| inexorable twist & turn of events than they could seriously claim
before the
| bar of history to have guided them.
|
| Peter Stewart
|
Renia
> Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan will both be viewed very differently
> at the Bar of History than they are by the poguenoscenti today.
>
> Hell, they won the Cold War ---- and without triggering World War
> III ---- a remarkable achievement.
I think Gorbachev had a lot to do with that. What's more, he was taking it
slowly and carefully. Then that bull-in-a-china-shop Yeltsin rushed in and
ruined Gorbachev's slow-burning initiative and led Free Russia into all
sorts of social problems.
Margaret Thatcher was a brilliant politician. But that's not the same as
being a brilliant prime minister. She was (and still is) divisive, and has
played a huge part in Britain's becoming a third-world country.
Renia
D. Spencer Hines
Thank you for posting it, Renia.
It rings of stark truth.
Yes, our educational establishments, both in the U.K. and the U.S., are
a dog's breakfast ---- in many venues ---- not all.
Was it your understanding that the boy with his head down, on his arms
on his desk ---- who seems to have been bright and to have known the
answers to all the questions ---- was simply bored and turned off by the
entire educational experience that you were observing?
Two entire lessons on drawing a Tudor rose?
Appalling.
It sounds as if the teacher ---- probably hamstrung by policies that she
must "bring all the students along together" and strongly discouraged
from sternly disciplining them or, God forbid, flunking any of them ----
did what most people would do under the circumstances.
That is, she simply dumbed the lessons down sufficiently and made the
standards so low that she could quite easily "bring them all along
together" and not suffer undue stress and anxiety herself.
Is that the way you see it?
--
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
"Much have I travelled in the realms of gold, And many goodly states and
kingdoms seen; Round many western islands have I been, Which bards in
fealty to Apollo hold." -- John Keats [1795-1821] -- Poems [1817] -- "On
First Looking Into Chapman's Homer"
All replies to the newsgroup please. Thank you kindly.
All original material contained herein is copyright and property of the
author. It may be quoted only in discussions on this forum and with an
attribution to the author, unless permission is otherwise expressly
given, in writing.
Vires et Honor.
"Renia" <PSim...@cwcom.net> wrote in message
news:3B3AF29D...@cwcom.net...
| I remember very little of the history I studied at Grammar School in
the
| sixties. My o-level syllabus (I failed) was taken mostly with the
Reform
| Movement and the political battles of Gladstone and Disraeli. We
studied zero
| medieval history, and touched on the Tudors and Stuarts. I don't
remember, but
| it was probably a long list of significant dates, without the stories
behind
| them.
|
| In the 80s, I took a history degree, and thought of becoming a history
teacher.
| In the late 80s, I went "on observation" at a school (my old grammar,
now turned
| into a comprehensive) but I was appalled at what I saw. A double
lesson was
| spent on drawing a Tudor rose for the cover of project work, with no
verbal
| input from the teacher, as to what the rose signified. Perhaps that
had been in
| a previous lesson. Another group had a test, but I had been told by
the teacher
| at lunchtime, that most of the pupils wouldn't turn up. She preferred
it that
| way, as the keen ones would then be able to get on without being
disturbed by
| the unruly ones.
| One boy spent the whole test with his head on his arms,
| apparently asleep on his desk. No pens. No papers. Apparently not
taking part in
| the test. At lunchtime, the teacher had told me that this pupil tended
to sniff
| correction fluid during lessons, which she ignored. At the end of the
test, I
| collected up all the papers, and she went through the answers. She
verbally
| called out the questions, and the sleeping boy correctly answered
every one,
| without raising his head.
Most of the others did dismally. In another lesson,
| the time was taken with feeling empathy for Russian factory workers in
after the
| revolution. Inspiring! Very little of the history that I observed that
day, was
| taken with British history, which seemed to have been almost worked
out of the
| curriculum. Most of the history during this period, was continental
20th century
| history, which, to me, is current affairs! I gave up all ideas of
being a
| history teacher.
|
| In the mid-90s, my sons studied history at the same school, and things
had
| changed a little. But in year 1, I would say that the subject was too
| challenging, concentrating, as it did, on historical methodology,
which I had
| studied as the foundation part of my degree. It was too complex a
subject for
| 11-year olds. The comparisons of types of sources took supercedence
over
| learning actual history, and my boys lost their way, even though my
younger son
| was very keen on history. This approach would have been better three
or four
| years later. Again, there was very little emphasis on British history,
and it
| was still a subject I did not want to teach.
|
| But I think the tide is beginning to turn, as it has been realised
that
| comparitively few people emerge from British schools today, with any
idea of the
| history of their own country. I'm not in touch with the latest
developments, but
| in the age of a Prime Minister who has virtually no knowledge of
British History
| (and thus has no concept of the nature of the 1000-year old unwritten
| constitution which he is slowly eroding) more emphasis is or will be
placed on
| British history, but without incorporating long lists of dates.
|
| I agree so much that if people could conceive that they are the
political (never
| mind genealogical) descendants of some of the fascinating people in
British
| history, that it would be a more enlightening subject for them to
study.
|
| Renia
| > Subject: Re: Plantagenet Correct Usage?
| >
| > > of ---- Medieval English Kings and Queens anymore. Slack-Arsed
David Mowbray
<D._Spence...@aya.yale.edu> writes
>Fair Enough. Thanks for the additional facts.
>
>However, the *battle* is known to History as the Battle of Stoke, *not*
>the 'Battle of East Stoke'.
Fair enough indeed! But you did write <at Stoke>, *not* <Battle of
Stoke>.
See below for the evidence.
Gotcha, I think! (Waits for applause.)
"You should say what you mean, and mean what you say." Lewis Carroll.
(Surely he would have made the verb "write" had he lived into the e-mail
era.)
This principle is oft implied in the postings of one DSH.
So let us all be pedantic!
David
Renia
> This is a really enlightening, yet depressing story.
>
> Thank you for posting it, Renia.
>
> It rings of stark truth.
>
> Yes, our educational establishments, both in the U.K. and the U.S., are
> a dog's breakfast ---- in many venues ---- not all.
>
> Was it your understanding that the boy with his head down, on his arms
> on his desk ---- who seems to have been bright and to have known the
> answers to all the questions ---- was simply bored and turned off by the
> entire educational experience that you were observing?
Quite possibly. At the time, he struck me as an exceptionally bright boy,
for whom the educational experience was just too slow. As that particular
teacher was not bothered (more below) whether her disruptive pupils turned
up, then he was, I concluded, quite at liberty not to turn up, either, yet
he did so. Because he wanted to. I said to the teacher: "What a waste of a
good brain", to which she responded: "Exactly".
> Two entire lessons on drawing a Tudor rose?
>
> Appalling.
All through my sons' secondary education, they spent much wasted time, in
various subjects, drawing covers for projects.
> It sounds as if the teacher ---- probably hamstrung by policies that she
> must "bring all the students along together" and strongly discouraged
> from sternly disciplining them or, God forbid, flunking any of them ----
> did what most people would do under the circumstances.
Yes. I don't blame the teacher. Many of her pupils were unruly, but she had
those who liked history. If she ignored the absence of the unruly ones, this
allowed the ones who were more keen to get on with the subject without
distraction. An awful situation, but, under the circumstances, I agreed with
her. (This was a GCSE-level class, not a younger class.)
As to discipline, this was a joke. In my day, we had the strap, and
detention, even lines. Today, there are detentions, but the only immediate
form of discipline that a teacher has, is to give the student a yellow form,
which the student must take to The Office. That's it. Big deal. Then there
is class or school suspension. Wonderful! Just what the kids want.
> That is, she simply dumbed the lessons down sufficiently and made the
> standards so low that she could quite easily "bring them all along
> together" and not suffer undue stress and anxiety herself.
No. The education system made the standards so low, and has dumbed down the
whole education system, as Rosie has implied, with the introduction of the
comprehensive system, the biggest national disaster in the history of
British education. The teacher followed the curriculum. She taught what she
was told to teach. As did many of the others.
During my observation, I spent the breaks in the staff room. This was the
same school I had attended myself, when it was a grammar school. One of the
French teachers from my own era was still there. She taught 1st division
French, to the more talented pupils, in my day. She was terrifying, then, in
the 60s. Now, in the 90s, she was crying in the break, because she couldn't
cope. So many of my friends who are or have been teachers, have had nervous
breakdowns and had to give up teaching.. One of my friends even ended up in
a mental hospital for several months.
A further example is my own son, an excellent mathematician from an early
age. When he was about 8 he was in a mixed-age class. That is, there were a
few children from both the school years above and below him. The school
year, birthday-wise, begins in September. As my son's birthday is in August,
that made him about the youngest of his age group. Therefore, there were
potentially children in his class who were anything up to 2 years younger,
and 2 years older than him - a 4-year gap in one class. Mathematically, he
outshone them all. But, he, like everyone else, sat at a table of 4
children, 2 facing each other, with no account taken of ability. They would
be instructed to go through the two facing pages of their exercise book, but
were not allowed to turn the page to the next batch of exercises, until all
4 children on the table had finished. This was far too slow for my son, who
was keen to move on. The only way to do this, was to do everyone else's
exercises as well. So he did the same exercises 4 times. And the other 3 did
not do their exercises at all, much to their delight. Then he could turn the
page, and start the process again. When I heard about this, I complained to
the headmaster, and told him it was doing nobody any good. From then on, my
son worked on his own, but I don't know if the practice continued.
During this period, I became what is known here as a Helping Mother. In the
enclosed classroom, the teacher herself, had about 4 pupils, 7-year-olds,
with whom she would concentrate on a particular subject. Meanwhile, I had
charge of the other 25 in the corridor, which was an open-plan classroom.
Some of the children were on the computer, and I would help them. Others
were doing manual dexterity with giant Meccano, and I had to watch them, as
well. Yet others were mucking about with other toys (under the guise of
manual dexterity and all that rubbish), and I had to watch them, as well. In
the meatime, other classes were passing through, on their way to other
classrooms, or to the changing rooms for PE (Physical Education for the
uninitiated.) At the same time, other Helping Mothers were in the same
L-shaped corridor, helping children with reading. In other words, constant
noise and distractions. The pleasures of open-plan teaching. Dreadful.
Further, I've just started a job as a sub-editor. My newspaper now has a
deliberate policy of taking on second-career people (preferably ex-teachers)
for this job, as the younger graduates are coming out of the universities
practically illiterate. We went on a short course, where the tutor told us
of a graduate, with a double first from Oxford, on a journalists' course at
his college, who could not string two sentences together and had no
conception of spelling.
I think the rot started in the early 70s. My friend (who later ended up in
mental hospital) and I wanted to go out one evening. She taught 5-year-olds.
The only way to go out, was if I helped her mark some simple (to us!)
exercises. I marked the first of mine, and it was covered in red pen. "Oh,
no!" she shrieked. "You're only allowed to mark 3 mistakes. No more. It
damages their confidence." And, finally, when my son was learning to read,
he struggled, because of the teaching method, which was by recognising whole
words, rather then understanding the structure of letters, and sounding-out.
So I taught him to read, much to the horror of my aunt, who was then a
headmistress in Zimbabwe (visiting us at the time) who told me not to
interfere with school teaching methods. I ignored her, carried on, and when
my son joined junior school at age 7 yrs and 1 month, he was found to have a
reading age of 11 yrs 4 months.
Sorry to be OT. One of my hobby-horses! But it does go some way to
explaining the, to my mind, appalling standards of British education today,
not only in history, but in all subjects. I do hope I'm out-of-date, and
that things are changing.
Renia
D. Spencer Hines
universities?
Political Correctness?
Was It Some Misguided Sense Of Egalitarianism And "Levelling"?
Lower The Standards Far Enough So That No Child Or Young-Adult Ever
Suffers "Loss Of Self Esteem"?
Professional Schools Too ---- Law Schools, Medical Schools, Schools Of
Journalism?
Frightening If So.
--
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
"Much have I travelled in the realms of gold, And many goodly states and
kingdoms seen; Round many western islands have I been, Which bards in
fealty to Apollo hold." -- John Keats [1795-1821] -- Poems [1817] -- "On
First Looking Into Chapman's Homer"
All replies to the newsgroup please. Thank you kindly.
All original material contained herein is copyright and property of the
author. It may be quoted only in discussions on this forum and with an
attribution to the author, unless permission is otherwise expressly
given, in writing.
Vires et Honor.
"Renia" <PSim...@cwcom.net> wrote in message
news:3B3BBE30...@cwcom.net...
Renia
> How on Earth did we allow this to happen to our schools, colleges and
> universities?
>
> Political Correctness?
>
> Was It Some Misguided Sense Of Egalitarianism And "Levelling"?
>
> Lower The Standards Far Enough So That No Child Or Young-Adult Ever
> Suffers "Loss Of Self Esteem"?
I think all of these have something to do with it, more's the pity.
> Professional Schools Too ---- Law Schools, Medical Schools, Schools Of
> Journalism?
Not the school of journalism I referred to. His comment was regarding the
lack of knowledge of the structure and use of English language of a British
national honours graduate of a top English university who intended to train
as a journalist.
> Frightening If So.
Indeed. Hopefully, the tide is turning. Unfortunately, there are 1 or 2
generations, now growing up, badly educated, who will be running the country
(in various capacities) in the next 30 years, and what damage might they do,
through ignorance, regardless of the (hopefully) better educated generation
which will follow them?
Renia
Ian Cairns
> "D. Spencer Hines" wrote:
<snip>
> I think the rot started in the early 70s.
<snip>
> Sorry to be OT. One of my hobby-horses! But it does go some way to
> explaining the, to my mind, appalling standards of British education
today,
> not only in history, but in all subjects. I do hope I'm out-of-date,
and
> that things are changing.
And one of the Ministers for Education in the early 1970s?
Step forward: Mrs Margaret Thatcher.... Milk Snatcher (aka Countess of
Grantham).
.. and to think that the Brits malign her ... one of their greatest
Prime Ministers?? ...
(Sorry - off topic)
Ian
Renia
Exactamundo. And, in saying that MT was a good politician, this does not
make her policies good, nor does it make her a good PM. She was good at
being a politician, in convincing people of her worth. Personally, I
thought she was a disaster at the time, and am more convinced of it as the
years go by. Charisma has a lot to answer for.
Renia
Lblanch001
> What was Tudor's justification for this? I understand
>his motive, given the speed with which he tracked down
>and executed all the York family members he could find.
>But surely he needed to have a pretext, if not a trial.
>
The real reason for Warwick's execution was the demand by Ferdinand and
Isabella that the Tudor dynasty demonstrate some stability before they'd let
their daughter Catherine marry into it. (A fine irony, considering the
outcome.)
The "official" reason given out was that Warwick confessed to complicity in the
Warbeck plot.
Sutton has published a Perkin Warbeck volume by Ian Arthurson -- the title
doesn't come trippingly to my fingers at the moment and I'm pressed for time.
Regards,
Laura Blanchard
lblan...@aol.com (or lbla...@pobox.upenn.edu)
http://www.r3.org/
(see http://orb.rhodes.edu/ to reach major medieval gateway sites)
Mark Stafford
<snip the first bit to get to this>
>
> Indeed. Hopefully, the tide is turning. Unfortunately, there are 1 or 2
> generations, now growing up, badly educated, who will be running the
country
> (in various capacities) in the next 30 years, and what damage might they
do,
> through ignorance, regardless of the (hopefully) better educated
generation
> which will follow them?
>
I'm afraid I'm one of those generations. My milk was snatched, the cane was
banned, and then I was the first year to hit GCSE's.
We knew it wasn't working, and we were the kids.
GCSE's are my biggest gripe - we studied for a year of the two year course
with no curricula - nobody had a clue how the exams would be marked, or even
what we should be taught. The science curricula came out in the second year
and we worked our butts off (although I'm not sure we ever got to a decent
enough standard) and the humanities curricula came out the year after my
exams :-) (The Art and Design curriculum took another 3 years.)
I'm not proud of my GCSE's - I put 'em on CV's and consider myself a
survivor. (Thank God for A-levels.)
But it wasn't the teachers, I have a lot of respect for them and even now
vividly remember some of my History and Geography lessons, they were screwed
by the establishment and the 'educational fashions'.
So if I ever spout crap on SHM you know to blame Mrs T. (my get-out clause
:-))
My younger sister and a close friend have become teachers in the last couple
of years - they are full of passion for the job, but I can see it draining -
there is no way to control the kids. My friend at a London 'inner-city'
problem school isn't even allowed to say 'stop' to the kids in case they
take it the wrong way, she has to find a 'non-confrontational way of telling
the kids to quit messing about. But they both say things are getting better
now the schools have set standards to reach, although this has caused
another crisis because of the paperwork involved - teachers want to teach,
instead they are being drowned in forms. (Hence they occaisionally give the
kids filler work, like project covers, whilst they sit at their desks and
try to get the paperwork done.)
I hope your right about things improving - as one of the badly educated
ignorant generation I'll try to keep what peers I can under control until
the next lot gets here... :-)
Mark.
Chris Bennett
Your comments on the problems in modern teaching methods and environment
seem to me to be right on, but I'd like to give a different view on history
syllabus. I don't think its such a bad thing that British history has been
downplayed in UK curricula. I wish Americans would place less emphasis on
US history in their schools.
I went through secondary school in Australia in the late 60s. The first
four years was all about Australian history -- the convict settlement, the
explorers (ad nauseam), the development of self-government and Federation,
and the evolution of the Commonwealth through the Statue of Westminster and
up to the Second World War. In retrospect, it was actually quite a good
curriculum, but it was very dull because it made absolutely no sense to
us -- there was no context for all this stuff. The only interesting piece
was on the Boer War, because this tied very directly into the Vietnam debate
raging at the time -- global power vs tough locals neither of whom
understood nor wanted to understand the other's agenda (in retrospect, its
also interesting that the Boer War was presented as an all-white affair).
For my HSC (Higher School Certificate) I had a choice between Ancient and
Modern History. I don't know if ancient history is still available,
obviously it was a remnant of the Victorian classical tradition. Medieval
and early modern was not available -- at the time, it was beginning to be
recognised that Australia was not just a little England in Exile. I chose
Modern. We did an intro course on historical methodology, the French
Revolution, Europe in the 19th century, China and Japan in the 19th and
20th (up to 1949/37), rise of Nazism, causes of 1st and 2nd world war,
Russian revolution and Stalin, and UK in the 1930s (I don;t remember much
about this one, it was pretty boring). There were other choices
available -- the history staff would rotate them every couple of years e.g.
to cover the US Civil War - Depression, or India in the 19th and 20th
centuries.
It was one of the most interesting and challenging courses I ever did,
including my university and postgraduate studies (which were not in
history). Even though History basically stopped with the Second World War,
it gave me an understanding of current world events I would never otherwise
have had because I knew something if what was happening on the inside in
other countries. And suddenly the earlier Australian stuff all made sense,
even though it was a World History course, with hardly a mention of
Australia, because I had the real context in which Australia was formed. So
I disagree that the diminishment of national history is a bad thing. Of
course national history (be it Australian, British, American or French)
should be studied. But studying world history enriches your understanding
of national history and allows you to distinguish nationalist myth and
propaganda.
I now live in the US. You have no idea how many people here swallow the
idiotic line that Reagan was a great president who "won" the Cold War
singlehandedly by outspending the Soviet military. Its as if the people and
governments of the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe only ever did anything
because of American policy. Peter Stewart is right, you can expect to see
the same lunacy trotted out when the Chinese Communist system is killed
off -- the Chinese themselves will have had almost nothing to do with it
except insofar as they were inspired by American ideals of Capitalist
Democracy. Its because everything is presented through American eyes only,
and that is possible because most people here only learn American history,
if they learn any history at all.
All this is totally OT, but I think its an important and interesting issue,
so I ask the forbearance of those who are not interested in it.
Cheers,
Chris
Renia <PSim...@cwcom.net> wrote in message
> > > of ---- Medieval English Kings and Queens anymore. Slacked-Arsed
> > > Democracy has bred it right out of them. : )
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Spencer
> > > --
> > >
> > >
>
>
D. Spencer Hines
dull because it made absolutely no sense to us -- there was no context
for all this stuff."
Chris Bennett ---- 29 June 2001
-------------------------------------
What an incredibly silly sentence. It's logically inconsistent as well.
It has no intelligent meaning whatsoever.
Pure Adolescent Twaddle.
PFK Manure.
You're right, Renia. We have several intellectually 'bent',
mal-educated, generations to deal with ---- essentially schlock ----
damaged goods in the marketplace.
And then we have this bromide from Bennett:
"We did an intro course on historical methodology, the French
Revolution, Europe in the 19th century, China and Japan in the 19th and
20th (up to 1949/37), rise of Nazism, causes of 1st and 2nd world war,
Russian revolution and Stalin, and UK in the 1930s (I don;t [sic]
remember much about this one, it was pretty boring).
-----------------------
Indeed.
I imagine Bennett finds all sorts of quite interesting things
"boring" ---- people often carp about that, when they don't understand
what's going on.
Pathetic!
Deus Vult.
--
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
"Much have I travelled in the realms of gold, And many goodly states and
Wade Hines
"D. Spencer Hines" wrote:
>
> "In retrospect, it was actually quite a good curriculum, but it was very
> dull because it made absolutely no sense to us -- there was no context
> for all this stuff."
>
> Chris Bennett ---- 29 June 2001
> -------------------------------------
>
> What an incredibly silly sentence. It's logically inconsistent as well.
>
> It has no intelligent meaning whatsoever.
>
> Pure Adolescent Twaddle.
It makes perfect sense. Something may easily be both a good curriculum
and dull, especially if the 'goodness' is judged retrospectively
which is one of the better ways to judge one.
There was even a reason given that explains both qualifiers: a lack
of context. One might easily suppose that said lack of context derives
from a naive perspective. It is possible that a student would find a
broad collection of new information dull if they were unable to place
it in a context they could find exciting. It is further possible that
further learning could provide context and use this earstwhile dull
foundation to build a more compelling tapestry. Those that can't
recognize this fact are as responsible for a decline in the quality
of education as those who dumb it down. While there is no virtue in
making something duller, it isn't true that all dull things lack virtue.
Still, while one might hope that a student could mature and appreciate
an experience that they once found trying, there is less hope that
a more aged curmudgeon would admit to a more positive focus, much
less to an outright error.
D. Spencer Hines
Revolution, Europe in the 19th century, China and Japan in the 19th and
20th (up to 1949/37), rise of Nazism, causes of 1st and 2nd world war,
Russian revolution and Stalin, and UK in the 1930s (I don;t [sic]
remember much about this one, it was pretty boring)."
Bennett The Bored ---- 29 June 2001
-----------------------
Anyone who can't find any "context" in the World Today [or, for that
matter, the World of 10-20-30-40 years ago] for that History is a Total
Idiot ---- or more likely, just a lazy pogue like Bennett, playing
little PFK games:
"I couldn't learn History, because it was boring and they didn't give us
any *context*. So, you can't blame me for being ignorant about these
things! I couldn't memorize all those facts and dates and names. It
was just too much for me!"
How Sweet It Is!
Look At This Specimen ---- "Educators" ---- This Is The End Game, The
Human Resultant Of Your Silly, Impracticable, Farblondjet, Pedagogical
Theories.
This Is Your "Product".
Now, In Business ---- A Firm And Its Managers Who Produced Such A Shoddy
Product ---- Would Soon Be Out Of Business.
Heal Thyselves ---- "Educators".
As we discovered with Curt Emanuel, and many other "Educators" ---- many
of you cannot even construct an English sentence and parse it properly.
Failing Grades For All Of You Who Have Been Downgrading The
Standards ---- And Graduating Shoddy, Uneducated "Products" ---- and
Turning Them Loose On The Rest Of Us.
You Ought To Be Ashamed Of Yourselves.
Deus Vult.
Dies Irae.
Veni, Vidi, Calcitravi Asinum.
Kathy McIntosh
writes
Massive snip
>Sorry to be OT. One of my hobby-horses! But it does go some way to
>explaining the, to my mind, appalling standards of British education today,
>not only in history, but in all subjects. I do hope I'm out-of-date, and
>that things are changing.
Unfortunately Renia, they have changed, but not for the better. As a
KS2 teacher of children with EBD and associated learning problems, I
constantly bang my head against the wall.
The National Curriculum dictates what we teach. In Maths, we have a set
programme to cover, and are even told how long to spend on each section.
If, at the end of that time, the children haven't grasped it, then tough
- you move on. You have to cover the term's set work in that term. If
Ofsted find that you are *not* covering the whole course, because you
think it's better for the children to be able to use the four rules,
tell the time and be able to manage money then to be able to say how
many vertices a do-decahedron has, you, as a teach, fail the inspection.
--
Kathy
Kathy McIntosh
<sb14...@wolmail.nl> writes
Snip
>GCSE's are my biggest gripe - we studied for a year of the two year course
>with no curricula - nobody had a clue how the exams would be marked, or even
>what we should be taught. The science curricula came out in the second year
>and we worked our butts off (although I'm not sure we ever got to a decent
>enough standard) and the humanities curricula came out the year after my
>exams :-) (The Art and Design curriculum took another 3 years.)
My boyfriend's daughter has just sat her AS level exams. She has been
in tears. Colleagues in secondary education have as well. They have
been expected to teach five terms work in three terms, and could see
that it wasn't working from very early on. Don't be surprised if there
are major changes again next year.
>
>I'm not proud of my GCSE's -
Be so - you did your best in a hard situation, and that's what counts.
Snip of account of Mark's sister's teaching troubles [which I can
sympathize with]
> teachers want to teach,
>instead they are being drowned in forms. (Hence they occaisionally give the
>kids filler work, like project covers, whilst they sit at their desks and
>try to get the paperwork done.)
>
Too true - and it's even worse in Special Ed, where everything has to be
noted on official forms and there are loads of reports for umpteen
different services, all needing to be done by the teacher.
--
Kathy
There is nothing more dangerous than a man with an idea.
Mark Stafford
"D. Spencer Hines" <D._Spence...@aya.yale.edu> wrote in message
news:uK3%6.413$1o3....@eagle.america.net...
> "In retrospect, it was actually quite a good curriculum, but it was very
> dull because it made absolutely no sense to us -- there was no context
> for all this stuff."
>
> Chris Bennett ---- 29 June 2001
> -------------------------------------
>
> What an incredibly silly sentence. It's logically inconsistent as well.
>
> It has no intelligent meaning whatsoever.
>
> Pure Adolescent Twaddle.
>
> PFK Manure.
>
> You're right, Renia. We have several intellectually 'bent',
> mal-educated, generations to deal with ---- essentially schlock ----
> damaged goods in the marketplace.
>
> And then we have this bromide from Bennett:
>
> "We did an intro course on historical methodology, the French
> Revolution, Europe in the 19th century, China and Japan in the 19th and
> 20th (up to 1949/37), rise of Nazism, causes of 1st and 2nd world war,
> Russian revolution and Stalin, and UK in the 1930s (I don;t [sic]
> remember much about this one, it was pretty boring).
> -----------------------
>
> Indeed.
>
> I imagine Bennett finds all sorts of quite interesting things
> "boring" ---- people often carp about that, when they don't understand
> what's going on.
>
> Pathetic!
>
<snip long sig>
A bit harsh. I get the impression he's just referring to the UK in the '30s
being dull - and it's not exactly riveting history.
In the absence of a curriculum for GCSE history the above (that Chris did
in Oz) is basically what we covered back when I was at school. It was rough
and little was covered in depth, but it's a grounding.
I'll never forget my History teacher jumping onto the table at the back of
our classroom and goose stepping across the desks like a demented John
Cleese
(not mentioning the war) leaping to the floor and banging a metre rule on
his desk. WHAM. and shouting: "France iz owerz. Blitzkreig haz given de
Reich all of Europe. Might iz right." I guarantee everyone in that class
will always remember the lesson, it helped sell History to us (not easy to
do with jaded teens) and most of that class took A-levels in History the
following year.
Thanks for the "We have several intellectually 'bent', mal-educated,
generations to deal with ---- essentially schlock ---- damaged goods in the
marketplace." line Mr. Hines, sir.
I have the highest respect for you too.
The education system may not be what it was, it may not be what you want it
to be, but for those of us educated in the 80's and up to today, it's what
we got. We didn't choose it, we were born when we were born and I object to
being written off as a bad job because of it.
The reason I read SHM is because I still want to learn, as I expect everyone
else here does to, your remark is not only rude, it is insulting and that
was before the post you made below.
You whine and you insult, but did you join the debate at the time, try to
effect some change, or just sit back and wait until you could say 'I told
you so'? It appears to be the latter, so if you have a problem with our
education, just remember you are as culpable as the "Educators" you're
blaming.
Mark.
(BTW, is your shift key broken or something?)
"D. Spencer Hines" <D._Spence...@aya.yale.edu> wrote in message
news:l05%6.446$1o3....@eagle.america.net...
Renia
> Renia --
>
> Your comments on the problems in modern teaching methods and environment
> seem to me to be right on, but I'd like to give a different view on history
> syllabus. I don't think its such a bad thing that British history has been
> downplayed in UK curricula.
PARDON? You have got to be joking.
No further comment. Going to South of France for a week!!
Renia
Renia
I'm talking comparitively, of course!
Just to say, with reference to school league tables, a headteacher has
been found guilty of correcting some of her pupil's work before being
assessed by the examination board. The pressures are just too great,
these days.
Renia
Off to South of France at 4am (i.e. 4.5 hours' time!!!)
Ian Cairns
"D. Spencer Hines" <D._Spence...@aya.yale.edu> wrote in message
news:l05%6.446$1o3....@eagle.america.net...
<snip>
> "I couldn't learn History, because it was boring and they didn't give
us
> any *context*. So, you can't blame me for being ignorant about these
> things! I couldn't memorize all those facts and dates and names. It
> was just too much for me!"
<snip>
While sitting a Maths Exam in the very early 1970s, our invigilator was
a History teacher, who had apparently taken the opportunity to mark some
first forms' history exam papers. Our school had a tradition of ~30% of
the history marks of the first form being given for a mix-and-match
table, e.g. 'select a name from the first column' and match it to the
'profession / title from the second column'.
Halfway through the exam, our concentration was disrupted by the teacher
falling off the chair while laughing / crying "The Venerable Bede was
The Caliph of Bagdad"
Ian
D. Spencer Hines
"boring" ---- is an unbridled idiot ---- and should probably be
sterilised and have his driver's license taken away from him.
Understanding Ramsay MacDonald, Stanley Baldwin, Neville Chamberlain,
Winston Churchill, Sidney and Beatrice Webb ---- just to pick several
important figures ---- is quite essential to an understanding of _Why
England Slept_ ---- as the young John Fitzgerald Kennedy put it, for his
Senior Thesis in History at Harvard.
Unless you understand _Why England Slept_ you can't understand Munich,
why World War II began and unfolded as it did ---- and why there are
still all of these scruffy little socialists and ragamuffins in Britain
to this day.
Read Freeman J. Dyson's _Weapons And Hope_ for some profound insights
into all this.
Who is Freeman Dyson? A Brilliant Brit ---- who at least used to be at
the Institute for Advanced Study, on Einstein Drive in Princeton.
_Au contraire_ to the flaccid opinings of some, Hines did speak up at
the time in the 1960's, 1970's, 1980's and 1990's and yes, he did fight
the idiots who were/are spouting and preaching codswallop and
balderdash ---- and he is still fighting them ---- thank you very much.
Not every member of every generation is damaged goods ---- to be sure.
I'm actually quite optimistic about many of the folks who have been born
since ----- say 1973 ---- or so. They are most impressive, on the
whole, as a generation ----- or two.
The Coefficient Of Flakiness [COF] is actually MUCH higher for those
born, in the United States, from say about 1943 through 1973, or so.
But let's face it, that's a spread of *30 years* ---- and truckloads,
shiploads and trainloads indeed of ---- DAMAGED GOODS are among them.
Not all are tainted.
Further, I don't believe this TWADDLE that:
"I can't help it. I was just educated under the system that was in
existence at the time. So, you can't blame ME!"
MORE COWARDLY ---- "I AM A VICTIM" ---- THINKING.
Pathetic Passive Pogues.
------------------
"Our object is not to teach that which is peculiar to any one of the
professions, but to lay the foundation which is common to them all....
The student must be thrown upon the resources of his own mind. Without
this, the whole apparatus of libraries, and instruments and specimens,
and lectures, and teachers, will be insufficient to secure distinguished
excellence. The scholar must form himself by his own exertions. The
advantages furnished by residence in a college can do little more than
stimulate and aid his personal efforts."
Faculty of Yale College ---- 1828
---------------------------------------
Deus Vult.
Fortem Posce Animum.
D. Spencer Hines
Anyone who thinks that studying the British History of the 1930's is
"boring" ---- is an unbridled idiot ---- and should probably be
sterilised and have his driver's license taken away from him.
Understanding Ramsay MacDonald, Stanley Baldwin, Neville Chamberlain,
Winston Churchill, Sidney and Beatrice Webb ---- just to pick several
important figures ---- is quite essential to an understanding of _Why
England Slept_ ---- as the young John Fitzgerald Kennedy put it, for his
Senior Thesis in History at Harvard.
Unless you understand _Why England Slept_ you can't understand Munich,
why World War II began and unfolded as it did ---- and why there are
still all of these scruffy little socialists and ragamuffins in Britain
to this day.
Read Freeman J. Dyson's _Weapons And Hope_ for some profound insights
into all this.
Who is Freeman Dyson? A Brilliant Brit ---- who at least used to be at
the Institute for Advanced Study, on Einstein Drive in Princeton.
_Au contraire_ to the flaccid opinings of some, Hines did speak up at
the time in the 1960's, 1970's, 1980's and 1990's and yes, he did fight
the idiots who were/are spouting and preaching codswallop and
balderdash ---- and he is still fighting them ---- thank you very much.
Not every member of every generation is damaged goods ---- to be sure.
I'm actually quite optimistic about many of the folks who have been born
since ----- say 1973 ---- or so. They are most impressive, on the
whole, as two [2] generations. ***
[*** N. B. [1] Those born in the 1961-1980 Generation [Generation 'X'],
but after 1973. [2] Those born in the following generation 1981-2000
[Millennial Generation]. We now have a new, post 2000, generation. The
highest Coefficient of Flakiness [COF] by far is found among those
people born between 1943 and 1960 ---- in the United States. ---- DSH]
The Coefficient Of Flakiness [COF] is actually MUCH higher for those
born, in the United States, from say about 1943 through 1973, or so.
But let's face it, that's a spread of *30 years* ---- and truckloads,
shiploads and trainloads indeed of ---- DAMAGED GOODS are among them.
Not all are tainted, however.
Chris Bennett
Mark Stafford <sb14...@wolmail.nl> wrote in message
news:9hivhi$cpp$1...@nereid.worldonline.nl...
> I'm replying in this thread as you've started it...
>
> "D. Spencer Hines" <D._Spence...@aya.yale.edu> wrote in message
> news:uK3%6.413$1o3....@eagle.america.net...
<snip>
> >
> > And then we have this bromide from Bennett:
> >
> > "We did an intro course on historical methodology, the French
> > Revolution, Europe in the 19th century, China and Japan in the 19th and
> > 20th (up to 1949/37), rise of Nazism, causes of 1st and 2nd world war,
> > Russian revolution and Stalin, and UK in the 1930s (I don;t [sic]
> > remember much about this one, it was pretty boring).
> > -----------------------
> >
> > Indeed.
> >
> > I imagine Bennett finds all sorts of quite interesting things
> > "boring" ---- people often carp about that, when they don't >
>understand
> > what's going on.
> > Pathetic!
> >
> <snip long sig>
>
> A bit harsh. I get the impression he's just referring to the UK in the
'30s
> being dull - and it's not exactly riveting history.
>
Indeed. Thanks for the defence Mark, but I long ago learnt that Hines is a
troll, better left ignored. He can read plain English, he just chooses not
to, just as he chooses not to tolerate any opinion other than his own,
whatever that may be in the current nanosecond.
Cheers,
Chris
Mark Stafford
someone would learn the lessons of history wouldn't you?
Mark.
"Kathy McIntosh" <ka...@knotland.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:uQg1Y2Bo...@knotland.demon.co.uk...
Mark Stafford
"D. Spencer Hines" <D._Spence...@aya.yale.edu> wrote in message
news:2n8%6.474$1o3....@eagle.america.net...
> Anyone who thinks that studying the British History of the 1930's is
> "boring" ---- is an unbridled idiot ---- and should probably be
> sterilised and have his driver's license taken away from him.
I agree (not with the sterilising though - a bit OTT), but try convincing a
class of 35 teenagers of that - especially when the history isn't joined up.
Everything was taught in isolation, Britain of the 30's was hardly ever
related to the rest of the world and how the changes there were effecting
other nations, and never, ever related to today and the situation Britain is
in.
Yes, some of the class linked their teachings together and it 'clicked' and
some of the class have gone on to become motor mechanics and brick layers
with little interest in History and no thought of those classes, but they
still spout crap in the pubs about things they should know better about -
and would - if the history had been linked together just that bit more. I
also agree this is their loss, and to a large extent their fault, if some of
us can do it why not all? But some people just aren't academically minded, -
they're still great to hang out with at the pub though.
> Understanding Ramsay MacDonald, Stanley Baldwin, Neville Chamberlain,
> Winston Churchill, Sidney and Beatrice Webb ---- just to pick several
> important figures ---- is quite essential to an understanding of _Why
> England Slept_ ---- as the young John Fitzgerald Kennedy put it, for his
> Senior Thesis in History at Harvard.
>
> Unless you understand _Why England Slept_ you can't understand Munich,
> why World War II began and unfolded as it did ---- and why there are
> still all of these scruffy little socialists and ragamuffins in Britain
> to this day.
>
> Read Freeman J. Dyson's _Weapons And Hope_ for some profound insights
> into all this.
>
> Who is Freeman Dyson? A Brilliant Brit ---- who at least used to be at
> the Institute for Advanced Study, on Einstein Drive in Princeton.
Dyson Sphere's yeah? I've heard of him, never read the book, thanks for the
recommendation.
> _Au contraire_ to the flaccid opinings of some, Hines did speak up at
> the time in the 1960's, 1970's, 1980's and 1990's and yes, he did fight
> the idiots who were/are spouting and preaching codswallop and
> balderdash ---- and he is still fighting them ---- thank you very much.
I apologise for my comments, it was wrong to make assumptions - keep up the
good fight.
> Not every member of every generation is damaged goods ---- to be sure.
If you'd made that clear in your first post I might not have responded so
harshly, but you did appear to right off millions of people - and you still
do so below, but let's not dwell on that... everyone has opinions.
> I'm actually quite optimistic about many of the folks who have been born
> since ----- say 1973 ---- or so. They are most impressive, on the
> whole, as a generation ----- or two.
Well, that saves my sisters, but I still fall into your educational black
hole :-) - that's if your view of the US education system can be transfered
to the UK anyway.
> The Coefficient Of Flakiness [COF] is actually MUCH higher for those
> born, in the United States, from say about 1943 through 1973, or so.
> But let's face it, that's a spread of *30 years* ---- and truckloads,
> shiploads and trainloads indeed of ---- DAMAGED GOODS are among them.
> Not all are tainted.
>
> Further, I don't believe this TWADDLE that:
>
> "I can't help it. I was just educated under the system that was in
> existence at the time. So, you can't blame ME!"
>
> MORE COWARDLY ---- "I AM A VICTIM" ---- THINKING.
>
> Pathetic Passive Pogues.
> ------------------
I think it's "twaddle" too, but then I'm here on SHM aren't I? It's the
others, those who left high school thinking their education was complete
that have been let down, history was not emphasised enough to them, they
never learnt it's lessons, this is the greatest tragedy.
<snip interesting Yale quote and long sig>
Mark.
(who will now try to post something OT to make up for this...)
Mark Stafford
"Chris Bennett" <cben...@adnc.com> wrote in message
news:3b3d2371$0$14541$19c6...@news.siscom.net...
I was defending several generations! I feel it was worth it...
Mark Stafford
Good story.
At high School I wrote an entire essay about Wolsey calling him Colbert the
whole way through, I still get embarrassed about it today just thinking
about it. (I got all the other facts right too, just the wrong damn name...)
Mark.
"Ian Cairns" <ne...@cairnsfamily.org> wrote in message
news:993855342.26759.0...@news.demon.co.uk...
Wade Hines
Mark Stafford wrote:
> Yes, some of the class linked their teachings together and it 'clicked' and
> some of the class have gone on to become motor mechanics and brick layers
> with little interest in History and no thought of those classes, but they
> still spout crap in the pubs about things they should know better about -
> and would - if the history had been linked together just that bit more. I
> also agree this is their loss, and to a large extent their fault, if some of
> us can do it why not all? But some people just aren't academically minded, -
> they're still great to hang out with at the pub though.
I do hope you aren't in the teaching profession. Regardless, you must
at time work with other people. The comment that "if some of us can do it why
not all?" is rooted in a deep ignorance. There are two distinct problems.
Simply put they are nurture and nature. Respective to the nurture part,
I'm mostly concerned that your attitude is antithetical to nurturing,
requiring that it had occurred through the graces of others before.
The nature part if more critical perhaps. There are lessons to be learned
through the many studies of dyslexia. In short, different people are
wired to learn in different ways. Many even seem to require multimodal
reinforcement in order to learn. There's a profound wisdom to the
old saying "say it, see it, write it" that goes directly to multimodal
learning. The same ideas apply to making connections to other contexts.
One could easily dismiss those who don't learn through the standard
methods as "unfit", "not academically minded" or perhaps worse but
that is really not an educated stance to take and is rather a cruel
irony from an educator.
Please consider the harsh words on ignorance in their best context.
Ignorance is a natural state but it is curable in small degrees.
All we can do is to each attempt to effect continuing cures and
not blame the sick.
D. Spencer Hines
Spoken like a long-term member of the Academic Gaggle that has created
the Crisis.
--
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
"Having taught in a university history department for more than 36 years
now, I would seek objectivity from anyone on the street before asking an
academic colleague in history." Norman Ravitch, Professor of History,
University of California, Riverside in _ The Wall Street Journal _ , 5
Nov 1998, p. A23.
All replies to the newsgroup please. Thank you kindly.
All original material contained herein is copyright and property of the
author. It may be quoted only in discussions on this forum and with an
attribution to the author, unless permission is otherwise expressly
given, in writing.
Vires et Honor.
"Wade Hines" <wade....@rcn.com> wrote in message
news:3B3DCFEA...@rcn.com...
Wade Hines
"D. Spencer Hines" wrote:
>
> Twaddle.
>
> Spoken like a long-term member of the Academic Gaggle that has created
> the Crisis.
The depth of your thought is reflected in the specifics of your reply.
The accuracy is consistent as I am not an academic.
Kathy McIntosh
<sb14...@wolmail.nl> writes
>LOL :-)
>
>Good story.
>At high School I wrote an entire essay about Wolsey calling him Colbert the
>whole way through, I still get embarrassed about it today just thinking
>about it. (I got all the other facts right too, just the wrong damn name...)
>
>news:993855342.26759.0...@news.demon.co.uk...
>>
>> a History teacher, who had apparently taken the opportunity to mark some
>> first forms' history exam papers. Our school had a tradition of ~30% of
>> the history marks of the first form being given for a mix-and-match
>> table, e.g. 'select a name from the first column' and match it to the
>> 'profession / title from the second column'.
>>
>> Halfway through the exam, our concentration was disrupted by the teacher
>> falling off the chair while laughing / crying "The Venerable Bede was
>> The Caliph of Bagdad"
>>
him, as he was very Special Needs] all about the Duck of Monmouth.
D. Spencer Hines
pedagogical blather like an academic ---- it's an academic.
Wade Hines [who is not even a true Hines] does all of the above and
therefore deserves to be classified as an academic ---- an unusually
stupid one ---- with a small, inefficient, limited brain and great
depths of stubborn willpower ---- dedicated to a propensity for
ignorance ---- as he has demonstrated to the full in his exchanges with
Nyikos.
--
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
"Having taught in a university history department for more than 36 years
now, I would seek objectivity from anyone on the street before asking an
academic colleague in history." Norman Ravitch, Professor of History,
University of California, Riverside in _ The Wall Street Journal _ , 5
Nov 1998, p. A23.
All replies to the newsgroup please. Thank you kindly.
All original material contained herein is copyright and property of the
author. It may be quoted only in discussions on this forum and with an
attribution to the author, unless permission is otherwise expressly
given, in writing.
Vires et Honor.
"Wade Hines" <wade....@rcn.com> wrote in message
news:3B3E0485...@rcn.com...
Brian M. Scott
<ka...@knotland.demon.co.uk> wrote:
[...]
>One of my pupils once wrote a beautiful paragraph [a great effort for
>him, as he was very Special Needs] all about the Duck of Monmouth.
And why not? One 16th c. copy of Walford's Roll (late 13th c.) tells
us that 'Le duck de Ostrich' bore 'gules a fese argent', while 'Le
duck de Lorangne' bore 'or une bende gules a treys eigles argent sur
le bende'. (In case the spellings are *too* obscure, those are
Austria and Lorraine.)
Brian
Mark Stafford
"Kathy McIntosh" <ka...@knotland.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:Kci87CCi...@knotland.demon.co.uk...
Cool! I expect he was a fowl overlord... quacks me up. ;-)
bogus address
> One of my pupils once wrote a beautiful paragraph [a great effort for
> him, as he was very Special Needs] all about the Duck of Monmouth.
Which was how Monmouth himself might have spelt it. I have seen
a music manuscript of 1675 which was most likely in the possession
of his close family at the time: one of the tunes is titled "The
Duck of Monmoth's Jigg". You find "duck" for "duke" in a lot of
17th and 18th century Scottish MSS.
========> Email to "jc" at this site; email to "bogus" will bounce. <========
Jack Campin: 11 Third Street, Newtongrange, Midlothian EH22 4PU; 0131 6604760
http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/purrhome.html food intolerance data and recipes,
freeware logic fonts for the Macintosh, and Scots traditional music resources
Mark Stafford
I'm sorry, and I guess I wasn't clear - I don't mean to blame anyone or look
down on them because of their academic abilities, but I do think everyone
has to push themselves to the limits of their capabilities, and when
teachers aren't leading the kids to this end then to some extent it has to
become the individuals responsibility to do so. I wish there were enough
teachers that everyone could be taught in the way that would best suit them,
but this isn't a perfect world and we all have to take responsibility for
ourselves and find a way that works for us.
Everyone of course has different abilities and levels - we are not automata.
But when individuals do not push themselves to achieving their full
potential, or even a little of it, it's a waste.
Dyslexia is separate case, my comment was in reference to the vast bulk of
school kids, I didn't mean it to be applied to those with other problems -
whether it be a disability or dyslexia. I know many dyslexics have gone on
to excel in life - and fortunately it is becoming more quickly diagnosed
with more and more ways of teaching around the condition becoming
available - in short they are finding ways to achieve their potential - as
we all should.
I'm not an educator (rest easy Wade) and I've had lots of arguments with
teachers about this (including my sister) so I really don't want to get into
one here! ( I suppose the fact that the people doing it everyday think I'm
talking crap should really tell me everything about my opinion shouldn't it?
Well bollocks, I'm still going to argue with 'em. (specially my sister -
really winds her up! :-))
Mark.
(On another thread DSH said Tony Blair was a socialist? Really? Someone
should tell him that.
TONY BLAIR PM = I TORY PLAN B )
D. Spencer Hines
However you've obviously been seduced by Tony Blair's Marketing,
Rhetoric, Packaging and Spin ---- into thinking that he is something he
clearly is not ---- a Pseudo-Tory.
Deus Vult.
--
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
"Having taught in a university history department for more than 36 years
now, I would seek objectivity from anyone on the street before asking an
academic colleague in history." Norman Ravitch, Professor of History,
University of California, Riverside in _ The Wall Street Journal _ , 5
Nov 1998, p. A23.
All replies to the newsgroup please. Thank you kindly.
All original material contained herein is copyright and property of the
author. It may be quoted only in discussions on this forum and with an
attribution to the author, unless permission is otherwise expressly
given, in writing.
Vires et Honor.
"Mark Stafford" <sb14...@wolmail.nl> wrote in message
news:9hllm8$be8$1...@nereid.worldonline.nl...
D. Spencer Hines
Intelligent comments on Education & Educators ---- in the main.
However, you've obviously been seduced by Tony Blair's Marketing,
Brant Gibbard
Scott) wrote:
> 'Le
>duck de Lorangne'
Haven't I seen that on restaurant menus?
Brant Gibbard
bgib...@inforamp.net
http://home.inforamp.net/~bgibbard/gen
Toronto, ON
Brian M. Scott
wrote:
> You find "duck" for "duke" in a lot of
>17th and 18th century Scottish MSS.
And I've plenty of earlier examples of <cunte> for <count>.
Brian
William Black
> Recte:
>
> Intelligent comments on Education & Educators ---- in the main.
>
> However, you've obviously been seduced by Tony Blair's Marketing,
> Rhetoric, Packaging and Spin ---- into thinking that he is something he
> clearly is not ---- a Pseudo-Tory.
Tony Blair is a product of his environment.
He's a public school and 'Oxbridge' educated lawyer.
Like most of the rest of the ruling clique of the Labour Party.
What gets them elected is that they are not completely crooked, unlike the
Tories.
The 'spin' fools no-one except the newspapers.
--
William Black
------------------
On time, on budget, or works;
Pick any two from three
D. Spencer Hines
Black ---- 1 July 2001
----------------------------
Spoken like a True Marxist.
Kathy McIntosh
<sc...@math.csuohio.edu> writes
The spelling is very like poor old Matty's - except he was trying for
standard English.
Kathy McIntosh
<bo...@purr.demon.co.uk> writes
>
>> One of my pupils once wrote a beautiful paragraph [a great effort for
>> him, as he was very Special Needs] all about the Duck of Monmouth.
>
>Which was how Monmouth himself might have spelt it. I have seen
>a music manuscript of 1675 which was most likely in the possession
>of his close family at the time: one of the tunes is titled "The
>Duck of Monmoth's Jigg". You find "duck" for "duke" in a lot of
>17th and 18th century Scottish MSS.
>
On second thoughts, it *was* rural Dorset :-}
William Black
> "Tony Blair is a product of his environment."
>
> Black ---- 1 July 2001
> ----------------------------
>
> Spoken like a True Marxist.
I'm not a Marxist, sorry.
I know that from where you are looking the difference between Marxist and
Socialist probably trivial but I have taken the time to differentiate you
from a Fascist and I expect you to have the good manners to do the same for
people at the other end of the political spectrum.
Michael Kuettner
Although foreigners also call it Australia.
Cheers,
Michael Kuettner
D. Spencer Hines
something they are babbling or burbling is simply warmed-over Marx or
Engels.
They may never even have READ Marx or Engels ---- but they have received
it third, fourth or fifth-hand from other sources.
They then bring those Marxist attitudes and foibles to the study of
Mediaeval History.
How Sweet It Is!
Deus Vult.
Exitus Acta Probat.
Veni, Vidi, Calcitravi Asinum.
--
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
"Having taught in a university history department for more than 36 years
now, I would seek objectivity from anyone on the street before asking an
academic colleague in history." Norman Ravitch, Professor of History,
University of California, Riverside in _ The Wall Street Journal _ , 5
Nov 1998, p. A23.
All replies to the newsgroup please. Thank you kindly.
All original material contained herein is copyright and property of the
author. It may be quoted only in discussions on this forum and with an
attribution to the author, unless permission is otherwise expressly
given, in writing.
Vires et Honor.
"William Black" <black_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9hnvqg$ig6$1...@neptunium.btinternet.com...
|
| D. Spencer Hines <D._Spence...@aya.yale.edu> wrote in message
| news:rnH%6.757$1o3....@eagle.america.net...
| > "Tony Blair is a product of his environment."
| >
| > Black ---- 1 July 2001
| > ----------------------------
| >
| > Spoken like a True Marxist.
|
| I'm not a Marxist, sorry.
|
| I know that from where you are looking [sic] the difference between
Marxist and
| Socialist [sic] probably trivial [sic] but I have taken the time to
Edward John Schoenfeld
>
>
> "Ian Cairns" <ne...@cairnsfamily.org> wrote in message
>>
>> While sitting a Maths Exam in the very early 1970s, our invigilator was
>> a History teacher, who had apparently taken the opportunity to mark some
>> first forms' history exam papers. Our school had a tradition of ~30% of
>> the history marks of the first form being given for a mix-and-match
>> table, e.g. 'select a name from the first column' and match it to the
>> 'profession / title from the second column'.
>>
>> Halfway through the exam, our concentration was disrupted by the teacher
>> falling off the chair while laughing / crying "The Venerable Bede was
>> The Caliph of Bagdad"
>>
What I would really like to know is what profession the student assigned to
Harun al-Raschid. :-)
Ed
Bronwen Edwards
Studies at a two-year college in California. I often hear the
uninformed people in the U.S. blame such programs as ethnic studies
for the obviously dismal state of American education in general
(Americans might remember the experiment done at the University of
Miami a few years ago in which almost half of the university students
in the test could not locate Miami on a map of North America). Two
points: First, the American system encourages Americans to be
a-historical, to find it boring enough so that they will not be
inclined to examine U.S. history too closely lest one find that
certain patterns are repeated endlessly. That said, I receive the
"damaged goods" in my classroom as products of the local educational
system. More than one person in American education has noted that what
once was regarded as a "special needs" student is today regarded as
"average". I have been teaching at the college level for more than 20
years, some of it at two-year colleges, some at state universities,
and about five years of it at University of California, Berkeley. My
observation is that when I began teaching American Indian Studies, the
students had already gotten enough of an education under their belts
to understand that I was providing another angle to a context in which
they were already fairly well versed, as in American Indians during
the Civil War, in World War II, etc. Today I cannot assume that they
know anything at all. They may hear about these wars, again as
examples, from me for the first time in their lives and it is nearly
universal that I am the first person to ask them (and teach them) to
do a research paper. Now some of this has to do with class - there
must be a certain class of students in this country whose educational
experience has been quite different. The cross section of our local
central California population in my college cannot write, often cannot
or will not read, has no sense of nor interest in where their nation
exists in a global context, and - worse - has no thoughts about their
future. In fact, they tell me they have no particular interests,
hobbies, or hope. I don't know what we as a society have done to these
kids, but please don't blame classes like ethnic studies. We often
must be the ones to wake these kids up and begin the education that
should have begun 18 years before this. Taking a bow, Bronwen Edwards
bo...@purr.demon.co.uk (bogus address) wrote in message news:<78...@purr.demon.co.uk>...
William Black
> Members of the Naive and Credulous Left often do not realise that
> something they are babbling or burbling is simply warmed-over Marx or
> Engels.
>
> They may never even have READ Marx or Engels ---- but they have received
> it third, fourth or fifth-hand from other sources.
How dare you presume I have never read Marx or Engles you smug patronising
bastard.
I've also read Lenin and Stalin (but he can be a bit dense, I wonder if
it's better in the original). I prefer the Webbs and Shaw and Tony Benn
myself. Although Benn's book on the Levellers is a bit romanticised
Now I know you live in a society where reading such books is in itself
suspect, but I don't.
D. Spencer Hines
Black The Red is so stupid he cannot even SPELL _Engels_. Yet he says
he has READ him.
Hilarious!
Deus Vult.
Exitus Acta Probat.
Veni, Vidi, Calcitravi Asinum.
--
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
"Having taught in a university history department for more than 36 years
now, I would seek objectivity from anyone on the street before asking an
academic colleague in history." Norman Ravitch, Professor of History,
University of California, Riverside in _ The Wall Street Journal _ , 5
Nov 1998, p. A23.
All replies to the newsgroup please. Thank you kindly.
All original material contained herein is copyright and property of the
author. It may be quoted only in discussions on this forum and with an
attribution to the author, unless permission is otherwise expressly
given, in writing.
Vires et Honor.
"William Black" <black_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9hq73j$q85$1...@neptunium.btinternet.com...
|
| D. Spencer Hines <D._Spence...@aya.yale.edu> wrote in message
| news:6AL%6.806$1o3....@eagle.america.net...
| > Members of the Naive and Credulous Left often do not realise that
| > something they are babbling or burbling is simply warmed-over Marx
or
| > Engels.
| >
| > They may never even have READ Marx or Engels ---- but they have
received
| > it third, fourth or fifth-hand from other sources.
|
| How dare you presume I have never read Marx or Engles [sic] you smug
Paul J. Gans
I can only give you my opinion and perspective on this. The
"old" educational system in the US was not at all universal,
in spite of the use of that term. Many students did not finish
grade school. Very very few finished high school.
School itself was a rigidly controlled environment in which not
only the students were treated badly (including corporal punishment)
but the teachers themselves, especially the female teachers, were
in some ways treated worse.
Practially the only students who went on to college were those
of either markedly special ability or the children of the upper
economic class. Many colleges such as Harvard and Yale were not
overly demanding, most students graduated with the "gentlemen's
C" as a grade.
What we have today is built upon this system. But the circumstances
of education have changed greatly.
The largest change came with World War II. That saw an enormous
increase in the demand for college education. Returning veterans,
guaranteed a college education in the single most revolutionary
law passed in the immediate post-war years, filled colleges to
capacity and beyond. Schools whose typical enrollments were
3,000 students jumped to 15,000 and more. Faculty were dug up
(sometimes almost literally ;-) from wherever they could. The
resulting stresses changed college life forever.
The trickle down was enormous. The children of those 1946-7
college students did NOT drop out of grade school, nor did they
drop out of high school. And those schools were not equipped,
either in philosophy or physical space to handle this. Since
those days our schools have been overcrowded and underfunded.
Culture wars have been fought over curricula. Few of the
students Bronwen Edwards works with would have made it beyond
grammar school in the early decades of the 20th century.
So it is easy enough for many of us to sit back and lament
the "failure" of education. I live in one of the richest
cities in the world, and yet the amount of money available
to be spent directly on books and other materials *per pupil*
per year is well under $5.00. There is hardly a school in the
city that does not need extensive repairs. Indeed, the grammar
school I first attended (now what is called a "middle school")
has not had any major reconstruction since I attended it more
than 60 years ago -- and it wasn't new then by a long shot.
You get what you pay for.
----- Paul J. Gans