Re: OT - Admiral Cochrane

On 14/10/11 12:26, Peter Skelton wrote:
On 14/10/2011 6:51 AM, William Black wrote:
On 14/10/11 04:46, Eugene Griessel wrote:
On Fri, 14 Oct 2011 01:00:22 +0100, William Black
<blackusenet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 13/10/11 19:04, Eugene Griessel wrote:
On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 10:49:06 -0700 (PDT), Chris<cmanteuf@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

On Oct 7, 5:11 am, Eugene Griessel<eug...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-15200427

I have to say it seems odd to me that they keep trying to make
Cochrane interesting, at least in the article, by referencing the
movie and PO'B. I would have thought Admiral Cochrane would be second
only to Nelson himself in terms of UK public recognition for RN
leaders. Maybe Drake, but whom else would be well known? Hardy,
Collingwood, Somerville, Cook, Bligh... I would expect Cochrane to
sit
above all of them in public fame and recognition. And yet the BBC and
(apparently) the National Museum of Scotland feel that he needs to be
explained, and they clearly have a better handle on British popular
culture than an American, so I must be wrong. Other than Nelson, who
would be the most famous RN commander in the current UK culture?

The modern British youth hardly knows who Churchill was, let alone
some eighteenth/nineteenth century seafarers. British history has a
plethora of "famous" admirals, some famous for their vast incompetence
and ineptitude while others less so. Perhaps too many for the modern
brain to encompass comfortably. However teaching military history
seems to be frowned upon in these modern times, echoes of days when
the bulldog still had teeth and that is definitely not PC.

The point about wars is that mainstream historians ignore them anyway.

Even when I studied English history at school forty years ago what was
considered important by the various examination boards wasn't the wars
themselves but their 'causes and effects'.

This remains true.

Wars are fun because there are victories and defeats, heroes and
villains, but in the great scheme of things what matters is why they
were fought and what happened after they ended.

What's important overall about WWII isn't, in a British context, the
Battle of Britain or the sinking of the Bismarck, it's the
implementation of the Beveridge Report, Indian independence and what
happened in Palestine.

History is more than the collection off acts. It is an attempt to make
the past meaningful to the people of the present.

In that context recording the details of the attack of Pearl Harbor
isn't history, it's antiquarianism.

What's important about that incident isn't the attack itself, but its
effect on the world, and especially on the USA and Japan.

Glad you got that off your chest? Finished labouring the obvious?

If it's obvious then why do you seem to wish to teach as history
something that isn't history.

History is more than a list of dates and the acts of great men.


You do realize that your two sentences above conflict.

Well no.

History isn't just about what happened.


--
William Black

Free men have open minds
If you want loyalty, buy a dog...
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT - Admiral Cochrane
    ... Cochrane interesting, at least in the article, by referencing the ... and they clearly have a better handle on British popular ... plethora of "famous" admirals, ... However teaching military history ...
    (sci.military.naval)
  • Re: OT - Admiral Cochrane
    ... Cochrane interesting, at least in the article, by referencing the ... The modern British youth hardly knows who Churchill was, ... However teaching military history ... The point about wars is that mainstream historians ignore them anyway. ...
    (sci.military.naval)
  • Re: OT - Admiral Cochrane
    ... Cochrane interesting, at least in the article, by referencing the ... I would have thought Admiral Cochrane would be second ... and they clearly have a better handle on British popular ... However teaching military history ...
    (sci.military.naval)
  • Re: OT - Admiral Cochrane
    ... Cochrane interesting, at least in the article, by referencing the ... The modern British youth hardly knows who Churchill was, ... However teaching military history ... The point about wars is that mainstream historians ignore them anyway. ...
    (sci.military.naval)
  • Re: OT - Admiral Cochrane
    ... Cochrane interesting, at least in the article, by referencing the ... and they clearly have a better handle on British popular ... However teaching military history ... In that context recording the details of the attack of Pearl Harbor ...
    (sci.military.naval)