I was talking more broadly about how English/British history as a whole is being reframed by a vocal minority and the fractures in society I think are a result. It wasn't specifically about Irish history, my commentary on that related to the personal experience I mentioned.Not really sure what you mean about the current narrative but I do think both sides need to start with an open point of view.
Anger is something I’m familiar with and is something I’m sensing, possibly wrongly from you, about your perception of an Irish viewpoint.
I think many of my contemporaries and a generation younger than me are beyond that.
I might be reading you wrongly.
But back to a history thread.
I try to see things objectively. Opinions are valid. North South east or west.
Personal narrative can be both informative and restrictive at the same time.I was talking more broadly about how English/British history as a whole is being reframed by a vocal minority and the fractures in society I think are a result. It wasn't specifically about Irish history, my commentary on that related to the personal experience I mentioned.
But according to recently postulated theories the Normans didn’t do much breeding with the locals, they stuck to their own,Even more inbred than you are
No but he has a man that could.Anyone can be a philanthropist regardless of status or net worth and I've even had a bit of a dabble myself.
But in all honesty, could that man fish with fly using a standard overhead cast and attractor?
I would imagine that is a wider set of topics than most would be taught. Certainly a great deal wider than I got.From my memory my school did quite ok I would say for history my recolection is we had two main subjects each year
Year 1 - Roman Britain and the norman invasion
Year 2 - The tudors and WW2
Year 3 - The boxer revolt to the rise of Mao Chinese history and viking britain
Year 4 - The traingular trans atlantic slave trade and English Civil war
Year 5 - Napoleoen and penisular war, forget the other subject.
Took me a while to remember themamd t he years may be in the wrong order, but I rrecall learning about all them.
I had to drop history in my options because it clashed with technical drawing. I always hated having to make that decision as I was top of the class in both. I remember doing, in years 1 to 3, the Tudors and Stuarts, the Great War and the Romans (found that last one a bit boring to be honest - probably because we did it, and the Normans, at primary school) . Can't remember doing WWII, though.From my memory my school did quite ok I would say for history my recolection is we had two main subjects each year
Year 1 - Roman Britain and the norman invasion
Year 2 - The tudors and WW2
Year 3 - The boxer revolt to the rise of Mao Chinese history and viking britain
Year 4 - The traingular trans atlantic slave trade and English Civil war
Year 5 - Napoleoen and penisular war, forget the other subject.
Took me a while to remember themamd t he years may be in the wrong order, but I rrecall learning about all them.
My Belfast Catholic mate presumed the same. When I was able to talk him through Bloody Sunday and that I learned it at school he was surprised.I tend to think that history was thought very subjectively when I was at school. I don’t know about now.
I am sure your curriculum was very different in Britain than it was in Ireland and your perception would have been very different to how we were thought.
I think history should be thought objectively. Some have made the point of history going back millennia rather than centuries and that is so valid in my view.
What we view as British or English or Irish or Scottish or French will be so different in another few 100 years or so and the whole DNA view of things is very relevant as far as I’m concerned.
Having said that, I’m interested in a British view of their recent history. ( The last few centuries)
Even more inbred than you are
I would imagine that is a wider set of topics than most would be taught. Certainly a great deal wider than I got.