Page 3 of 3

Posted: Wed Jun 07, 2006 11:44 pm
by Coady
Um...slight deviation from "Romans in England"..somehow we've come right down to soccer... that English ball game.

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2006 11:50 am
by Marhak
Coady, it's even worse than that. Last July, Time Team proudly showed off a London schools where the kids were being taught that, when the Romans were in Britain, the natives were speaking English. A few of us fired off furious e-mails to Channel 4 and, on the next programme, Tony Robinson was forced to apologise. But is that school (and how many others) still teaching their sprogs this manipulated "history"?


Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2006 6:41 pm
by HazelM
For most people (those not well-informed in history), saying "England" helps them place the happenings. True, it might be better to say "invaded what is today England". (I think that is the area where the Romans first landed, isn't it?)

Sometimes we who know have to be tolerant of those who don't. If the opportunity presents itself and the listener is willing to hear, we can educate them. Otherwise, enjoy life.

As a sideline but to the point, a few years ago, the head of our state Historical Society told me that there is no such place as Wales. I hate to think what she'd say about Cornwall. I did elucidate for her but I doubt I convinced her. Some people don't want to learn.

Oh my, I just remembered a song that we sang during WW II: "There'll always be an England". Anyway, live and let live. Hazel

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2006 6:47 pm
by HazelM
<<English history is like a Dan Brown novel, a little bit of fact mixed with a pinch of make believe but put together in a way that makes it feasable.>>

Change "English" to "All" and you'll have it down pat. Hazel

Re: Romans in England?

Posted: Tue Oct 05, 2010 5:00 pm
by Gower
HazelM is correct.

Imperialists do tend to think in sloppy ways.