True or false

[Tim]

As opposed to the beknighted 21st in which we have lived in a period of almost constant peace...

[Mark G]

Oh rich,

You ruined it for everyone.

[eques]

The middle ages were a time of constant war.

True
Or
False?

(believe it or not, this is an official question in the current British citizenship test).

Man, I hate stupid bureaucrats.

[DougM]

Time to vote guys.

I'll post the 'correct' answer in a day or two, and we will see who gets to be British or not.

(no uk voters might want to self identify).

Not all the questions are so shoddy, who beat the Vikings (lists Anglo Saxon kings), which part of England did Boudicca come from (east, west, etc), what year was Bosworth.  All reasonable to ask.

But this one ...

Which begs the question - why would a test for UK citizenship ask questions about a nation that ISN'T the UK?   England=/=UK. Were there questions about the Battle of Largs?  Edward Bruce,  Welsh Kings? The Covenanters??  Kenneth McAlpin?  Who was at least as significant to one kingdom making up the UK as Alfred was to another.

[Mark G]

There were lots of questions about each region. And not just the hone "nations" either, but actual regions.

And they are all pretty reasonable, and none mentioned coronation street or x factor.

The history ones were mostly quite reasonable.

Except that one, which was clearly written by the sociology graduate intern.
Or the commerce graduate.
Or possibly former education minister, Charles Clarke. 
And if you know why him, you get automatic citizenship.

[DougM]

So why is it reasonable for a Scot (for example) to know the date of Bosworth, or where Boudica came from or who Alfred was? It is genuinely NOT part of their history. It's the history of another country before the two joined in a Union.

Would you set a test for Spanish citizens that asked questions about Portugal?  Or a test of American citizenship that asked questions about the Mexican state of California?  Seriously, if you don't see why this is problematic - then that's very strange.

So what questions were asked about Northern Ireland, Wales and Scotland? Enquiring minds want to know.

[Patrick Waterson]

So why is it reasonable for a Scot (for example) to know the date of Bosworth, or where Boudica came from or who Alfred was? It is genuinely NOT part of their history. It's the history of another country before the two joined in a Union.

One can think of two reasons.

1) Scotland is now part of the UK, despite some recent attempts to the contrary.  This makes the history of all UK territories relevant in retrospect without prejudice to Scots history itself.  On the same basis, people born in Mercia, Essex and Northumbria learn about King Alfred, despite having been part of the Danelaw.

2) Civilised people are (among other things) those who study the history of other peoples as opposed to just having a loose grasp of their own.  If Scots were to learn only the history of Scotland, they would lose this important advantage and criterion of civilisation.

Another thought is that quite a bit of the UK's history has been written by Scots historians ...

[Erpingham]

Although I do think using the definition of Middle Ages I was taught in primary school (1066-1485) anchored as it is on two English dynastic changes, was rather naff.  Using a "neutral" date range (e.g. 1000-1500) would at least be equally arbitrary to all parts of the UK.

[DougM]

One can think of two reasons.

1) Scotland is now part of the UK, despite some recent attempts to the contrary.  This makes the history of all UK territories relevant in retrospect without prejudice to Scots history itself.  On the same basis, people born in Mercia, Essex and Northumbria learn about King Alfred, despite having been part of the Danelaw.

Ah, I presume then that details of Scottish history prior to the Union are broadly taught across the UK and treated with the same level of attention?

You're having a laugh aren't you?

Who were 'The red and the black' ?  - 'what was the black dinner?' - 'who was known as 'Bell the Cat'? -  who was Rizzio?'  or even 'who was considered the first king of a united Scotland?

Or is it only the non-English components of the UK that are required to learn another country's history and treat it as their own?

Seriously this in other countries and times was known as rewriting history to support assimilation.  Exactly the same thing happened in Poland many times, in every soviet socialist republic, etc.  Much easier to do in Australia with the deliberate excision of thousands of years of history in preference to a narrative of Terra Nullius - done in Africa so that even today, most westerners assume there was no such thing as Sub-Saharan civilisation.

I don't mean to be offensive - but I am pointing out what I see as a real case of cognitive dissonance - or a blind spot - that as individuals with even a passing historical interest, we should be able to see.

[Erpingham]

Who were 'The red and the black' ?  - 'what was the black dinner?' - 'who was known as 'Bell the Cat'? -  who was Rizzio?'  or even 'who was considered the first king of a united Scotland?

Most UK Scots commentators on this problem include Darien (critical to the fate of independent Scotland, virtually unknown in England).

Doug has a fair point but, truthfully, history has such a low status in our education system, I doubt this will be rectified in the near future.

PS I think the first four of Doug's questions are pretty straightforward but the last one could cause some debate

[Mick Hession]

I read "The Isles: A History" by Norman Davies last year. In his introduction he raises the same points as Doug and bemoans historians' tendency to equate the history of the archipelago with that of England. Unfortunately he then manages to pretty much ignore the history of my bit of Ireland once we stopped being part of the UK in 1922.....

Cheers
Mick

[DougM]

I read "The Isles: A History" by Norman Davies last year. In his introduction he raises the same points as Doug and bemoans historians' tendency to equate the history of the archipelago with that of England. Unfortunately he then manages to pretty much ignore the history of my bit of Ireland once we stopped being part of the UK in 1922.....

Cheers
Mick

Well - If those in Eire want to be treated as part of an archipelago or geographic entity rather than a political one, that's a pretty reasonable complaint.

[Swampster]

The required reading for the citizenship test are really very broad strokes of history. Henry VIII's wives do get rather detailed coverage, but Mary QoS gets more than Elizabeth I. I think the only battle to get two mentions is Bannockburn. Alfred and Kenneth McAlpin get the same coverage - one short sentence each.

The tests are sample tests.. It would be just as possible to get a question about Alfred as Kenneth. I happened to get two questions on naming 2 UK landmarks - 2 English, 1 Welsh, 1 N. Irish in my examples, so I imagine Scottish examples could also appear. The vast majority of the test is not about history. There are a few debateable answers too - I was asked a question about the role of school governors and it said it did not include setting the school curriculum (they do for Social and Personal education, esp. sex) .

Time to vote guys.

I'll post the 'correct' answer in a day or two, and we will see who gets to be British or not.

(no uk voters might want to self identify).

Not all the questions are so shoddy, who beat the Vikings (lists Anglo Saxon kings), which part of England did Boudicca come from (east, west, etc), what year was Bosworth.  All reasonable to ask.

But this one ...

Which begs the question - why would a test for UK citizenship ask questions about a nation that ISN'T the UK?   England=/=UK. Were there questions about the Battle of Largs?  Edward Bruce,  Welsh Kings? The Covenanters??  Kenneth McAlpin?  Who was at least as significant to one kingdom making up the UK as Alfred was to another.

[DougM]

The required reading for the citizenship test are really very broad strokes of history. Henry VIII's wives do get rather detailed coverage, but Mary QoS gets more than Elizabeth I. I think the only battle to get two mentions is Bannockburn. Alfred and Kenneth McAlpin get the same coverage - one short sentence each.

The tests are sample tests.. It would be just as possible to get a question about Alfred as Kenneth. I happened to get two questions on naming 2 UK landmarks - 2 English, 1 Welsh, 1 N. Irish in my examples, so I imagine Scottish examples could also appear. The vast majority of the test is not about history. There are a few debateable answers too - I was asked a question about the role of school governors and it said it did not include setting the school curriculum (they do for Social and Personal education, esp. sex) .

Is that school governors in England and Wales?  I don't believe they exist in the separate and different Scots Education system.. (Scottish School Act 2006)  so conceivably you could in respect of law, education, established religion, and other areas, give an answer that was perfectly correct in Scotland but get marked as incorrect as it was different in England?

Are you sure this was a 'UK Citizenship Test' and not an 'England & possibly Wales and N. Ire Citizenship Test'?  ;-)

[Duncan Head]

The required reading for the citizenship test are really very broad strokes of history. Henry VIII's wives do get rather detailed coverage, but Mary QoS gets more than Elizabeth I. I think the only battle to get two mentions is Bannockburn. Alfred and Kenneth McAlpin get the same coverage - one short sentence each.

The tests are sample tests.. It would be just as possible to get a question about Alfred as Kenneth. I happened to get two questions on naming 2 UK landmarks - 2 English, 1 Welsh, 1 N. Irish in my examples, so I imagine Scottish examples could also appear. The vast majority of the test is not about history. There are a few debateable answers too - I was asked a question about the role of school governors and it said it did not include setting the school curriculum (they do for Social and Personal education, esp. sex) .

Is that school governors in England and Wales?  I don't believe they exist in the separate and different Scots Education system.

No, following the link given earlier, it's

School governors, or members of the school board in Scotland, are people from the local community who wish to make a positive contribution to children's education ...

But you'd rather rant than check. This is getting boring.