• Existing user of old message board?

    Your username will have transferred over to this new message board, but your password will need to be reset. Visit our convert your account page, to transfer your old password over.

Wolf Hall

Stirlingsays said:
The scale of trade would have been very low in relative terms, as in not a regular thing. Back then trade was highly risky, losses at sea would scale with distance via storms and piracy. That kind of trade required large investments. Most external trade was localised to Europeans for these reasons.

That said it would have happened but we all know the false picture they are trying to create. They want to moralise and emphasise rare events because it's important to them personally. They aren't interested in anything approaching truth unless it coincides with what they are pushing.
Click to expand...
Funny really because some of the truth is quite interesting: Blacks in Tudor Britain

And no one needs to offend anyone - could have done the real story without the stupid woke crap.
 
ASCPFC said:
Funny really because some of the truth is quite interesting: Blacks in Tudor Britain

And no one needs to offend anyone - could have done the real story without the stupid woke crap.
Click to expand...
'Since writing this entry, I have found evidence of over 350 Africans living in Britain 1500-1640, while researching my D.Phil thesis 'Africans in Britain, 1500-1640'

Yeah, I doubt it.....smacks of an agenda to me.
 
Stirlingsays said:
'Since writing this entry, I have found evidence of over 350 Africans living in Britain 1500-1640, while researching my D.Phil thesis 'Africans in Britain, 1500-1640'

Yeah, I doubt it.....smacks of an agenda to me.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't completely discount it but would think that the figure sounds higher than I would have thought.
The agenda here is funding, of course. You're going to get a grant/scholarship for that aren't you? The way academia is now - which is exactly where even the book Wolf Hall is - let alone the TV series. It's for political correctness rather than reality. Palatable or unpalatable, both are used when required.

If you consider it, if there were black nobles and kings we would now be celebrating it. If black people were mainly servants, then we'd be berating it. Both ways would have the same politically correct agenda. A bit like some kind of societal reparations we're so desperate to do. Same thing goes for the number of Africans in Britain. Low number =racist, high number = clearly ignored by history. Neither are true as I had heard all about it in very common sources decades ago. But that is where the funding is - so I guess what the paymasters want.
 
Stirlingsays said:
'Since writing this entry, I have found evidence of over 350 Africans living in Britain 1500-1640, while researching my D.Phil thesis 'Africans in Britain, 1500-1640'

Yeah, I doubt it.....smacks of an agenda to me.
Click to expand...
Assuming that number is true so what? How many of them actually made their mark on history?

During the Windrush scandal one of the more absurd claims was that black people rebuilt this country after the war which is why owe a debt to the Windrush generation*. People were referred to as the Windrush generation even though they came to this country in the 1970's.

Of course that simply wasn't true by the time black people were here in sufficient quantities (long after Windrush) this country had already recovered from the war damage.

*Windrush was a scandal because the Home Office screwed up and these people were treated badly.
 
Badger11 said:
Assuming that number is true so what? How many of them actually made their mark on history?

During the Windrush scandal one of the more absurd claims was that black people rebuilt this country after the war which is why owe a debt to the Windrush generation*. People were referred to as the Windrush generation even though they came to this country in the 1970's.

Of course that simply wasn't true by the time black people were here in sufficient quantities (long after Windrush) this country had already recovered from the war damage.

*Windrush was a scandal because the Home Office screwed up and these people were treated badly.
Click to expand...
Well, the one who apparently made it on to Henry VIII's Privy Council, the one who aided Thomas Cromwell, and the one who was somehow (white) Jane Seymour's (mixed race) sister.
 
ASCPFC said:
I wouldn't completely discount it but would think that the figure sounds higher than I would have thought.
The agenda here is funding, of course. You're going to get a grant/scholarship for that aren't you? The way academia is now - which is exactly where even the book Wolf Hall is - let alone the TV series. It's for political correctness rather than reality. Palatable or unpalatable, both are used when required.

If you consider it, if there were black nobles and kings we would now be celebrating it. If black people were mainly servants, then we'd be berating it. Both ways would have the same politically correct agenda. A bit like some kind of societal reparations we're so desperate to do. Same thing goes for the number of Africans in Britain. Low number =racist, high number = clearly ignored by history. Neither are true as I had heard all about it in very common sources decades ago. But that is where the funding is - so I guess what the paymasters want.
Click to expand...

I suspect there is a lot of truth in your analysis.

It always comes down to incentive, when we look at what's coming out of universities and who the institutions are hiring it's pretty much all 'progressive' where anti white perspectives on our history and culture are commonplace.....nay I suspect required.
 
silvertop said:
Well, the one who apparently made it on to Henry VIII's Privy Council, the one who aided Thomas Cromwell, and the one who was somehow (white) Jane Seymour's (mixed race) sister.
Click to expand...

Give them enough time and they will convincing us we are all black.

Once you go black you don't go back.

Tis a fam ting bruv.
 
Stirlingsays said:
I suspect there is a lot of truth in your analysis.

It always comes down to incentive, when we look at what's coming out of universities and who the institutions are hiring it's pretty much all 'progressive' where anti white perspectives on our history and culture are commonplace.....nay I suspect required.
Click to expand...

How to Address Diversity in Research Proposals - A Guide - This is us! - Maastricht University

www.maastrichtuniversity.nl www.maastrichtuniversity.nl

Look up any research funding stream and you'll find this. It is, as you say, whereas previously expected but not explicitly required, now entirely necessary. And believe you me, no one will even take you on for research unless you address this - funding or not.

A funny story from my university is where a lecturer (quite high in his field but in reality not that good, and a drunk) compiled a collection of research papers into a published volume on slavery and it's consequences. When reviewers realised there were no contributions from people of colour or mixed race, he was taken to the cleaners. However, in Ireland, have a permanent position and they can never get rid of you. The guy's a tool but not even the worst there. Another female one shouts around the place, has written one book 30 years ago, and is basically always wrong. But again she will retire in the knowledge she has misinformed students for twenty years. I've had my run ins with her.

I've left academia recently enough (during COVID), I'm a Tudor Historian who worked with people like Starkey. Which makes me think I should give a true appraisal of Wolf Hall. However, it's clearly going to be clichéd tripe to me and I didn't want to bore people - like I am now. Mantel was nothing really but wrote a popular book and is now supposedly an expert. It's the new way to be a top historian, in reality it's not that new. Entertaining people is often more important than real historical research.

Reminds me of when I said I'd reconcile the Early Modern History of England and Ireland - did I f***! Good for funding though. I had all of the top scholarships and research grants. Time of my life really.

You need the buzz words to get funding basically. You can pretty much follow a template and chuck a load of nonsense you won't do into it. Then you're on the gravy train until the four years runs out.
 
ASCPFC said:

How to Address Diversity in Research Proposals - A Guide - This is us! - Maastricht University

www.maastrichtuniversity.nl www.maastrichtuniversity.nl

Look up any research funding stream and you'll find this. It is, as you say, whereas previously expected but not explicitly required, now entirely necessary. And believe you me, no one will even take you on for research unless you address this - funding or not.

A funny story from my university is where a lecturer (quite high in his field but in reality not that good, and a drunk) compiled a collection of research papers into a published volume on slavery and it's consequences. When reviewers realised there were no contributions from people of colour or mixed race, he was taken to the cleaners. However, in Ireland, have a permanent position and they can never get rid of you. The guy's a tool but not even the worst there. Another female one shouts around the place, has written one book 30 years ago, and is basically always wrong. But again she will retire in the knowledge she has misinformed students for twenty years. I've had my run ins with her.

I've left academia recently enough (during COVID), I'm a Tudor Historian who worked with people like Starkey. Which makes me think I should give a true appraisal of Wolf Hall. However, it's clearly going to be clichéd tripe to me and I didn't want to bore people - like I am now. Mantel was nothing really but wrote a popular book and is now supposedly an expert. It's the new way to be a top historian, in reality it's not that new. Entertaining people is often more important than real historical research.

Reminds me of when I said I'd reconcile the Early Modern History of England and Ireland - did I f***! Good for funding though. I had all of the top scholarships and research grants. Time of my life really.

You need the buzz words to get funding basically. You can pretty much follow a template and chuck a load of nonsense you won't do into it. Then you're on the gravy train until the four years runs out.
Click to expand...

It's to our detriment that it isn't people like you in these positions and instead we get this harmful agenda driven tripe infecting young minds to hate what they are and fetishise what they aren't.
 
ASCPFC said:

How to Address Diversity in Research Proposals - A Guide - This is us! - Maastricht University

www.maastrichtuniversity.nl www.maastrichtuniversity.nl

Look up any research funding stream and you'll find this. It is, as you say, whereas previously expected but not explicitly required, now entirely necessary. And believe you me, no one will even take you on for research unless you address this - funding or not.

A funny story from my university is where a lecturer (quite high in his field but in reality not that good, and a drunk) compiled a collection of research papers into a published volume on slavery and it's consequences. When reviewers realised there were no contributions from people of colour or mixed race, he was taken to the cleaners. However, in Ireland, have a permanent position and they can never get rid of you. The guy's a tool but not even the worst there. Another female one shouts around the place, has written one book 30 years ago, and is basically always wrong. But again she will retire in the knowledge she has misinformed students for twenty years. I've had my run ins with her.

I've left academia recently enough (during COVID), I'm a Tudor Historian who worked with people like Starkey. Which makes me think I should give a true appraisal of Wolf Hall. However, it's clearly going to be clichéd tripe to me and I didn't want to bore people - like I am now. Mantel was nothing really but wrote a popular book and is now supposedly an expert. It's the new way to be a top historian, in reality it's not that new. Entertaining people is often more important than real historical research.

Reminds me of when I said I'd reconcile the Early Modern History of England and Ireland - did I f***! Good for funding though. I had all of the top scholarships and research grants. Time of my life really.

You need the buzz words to get funding basically. You can pretty much follow a template and chuck a load of nonsense you won't do into it. Then you're on the gravy train until the four years runs out.
Click to expand...
Kind of why I want my kids to go into the pure sciences.

Or heating engineers.
 
silvertop said:
Kind of why I want my kids to go into the pure sciences.

Or heating engineers.
Click to expand...
Decent point. The humanities aren't t worth it - and aren't where the money is anyway.
Obviously, Computer Science quite a good one too.
Trades are great, I'd much rather do it.
But I'm stuck in a cycle of high pay for little to no work, with minimal oversight and loads of holidays. I don't like it at all but you have to be practical don't you.
 
ASCPFC said:
Decent point. The humanities aren't t worth it - and aren't where the money is anyway.
Obviously, Computer Science quite a good one too.
Trades are great, I'd much rather do it.
But I'm stuck in a cycle of high pay for little to no work, with minimal oversight and loads of holidays. I don't like it at all but you have to be practical don't you.
Click to expand...
Sounds perfectly ghastly. But the the old Dunkirk spirit will see you through. When times get tough - run away.
 
Teddy Eagle said:
Yep. As the great W.C.Fields said - If at first you don't succeed try again. Then give up. There's no point being a damn fool about it.
Click to expand...

Far easier to snipe from the sidelines at the over promoted fruity they/thems in the arenas.

Especially as today's arenas seem to have morphed into padded cells.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top