New History Prefix

(Log in to remove this ad.)

John

Verve Clique Oh!
Joined
May 20, 2006
Posts
11,565
Likes
5,605
Location
In the Clique.
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
#6
So we discuss a book we have read for example? I read a lot of History, got a backlog as long as your arm, but never seem to talk to anyone about them. Prefer history books to footy books to be honest. I have been reading Sheeds autobiography and it so bloody boring that I will be glad when I have finished it.
 

CAS79

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Posts
16,132
Likes
2,395
Location
around about
AFL Club
Sydney
#7
So we discuss a book we have read for example? I read a lot of History, got a backlog as long as your arm, but never seem to talk to anyone about them. Prefer history books to footy books to be honest. I have been reading Sheeds autobiography and it so bloody boring that I will be glad when I have finished it.
Feel free to discuss a book, an incident, a person... just because it says so though John in one book does not mean another historian has another take.
 

John

Verve Clique Oh!
Joined
May 20, 2006
Posts
11,565
Likes
5,605
Location
In the Clique.
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
#10
My other half parents are well older than that bit if it's on a history doco on TV ist must be true, despite what counter arguments many decent historians make.
Yeah I get your point. When I got pay TV on years back the first couple of History Channel shows I watched disappointed me so much I did watch the channel again for a while but I was a bit hasty as it has some very good shows and of course some very bad show.

But I do agree. If one takes an interest in a specific period of History then it is best to get differing views. Tudor history has been my rather well read period where as there are other areas that I just have no idea about.

A good example of what you are suggesting though is Neil Olivers very interesting History of Scotland on SBS. He gave IMO Alexander II fairly short shrift but on further reading of David Ross's Scotland History Of A Nation, Ross claimed him to be an energetic Social reformer. Both interesting historians but differing views.
 

CAS79

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Posts
16,132
Likes
2,395
Location
around about
AFL Club
Sydney
#11
Yeah I get your point. When I got pay TV on years back the first couple of History Channel shows I watched disappointed me so much I did watch the channel again for a while but I was a bit hasty as it has some very good shows and of course some very bad show.

But I do agree. If one takes an interest in a specific period of History then it is best to get differing views. Tudor history has been my rather well read period where as there are other areas that I just have no idea about.

A good example of what you are suggesting though is Neil Olivers very interesting History of Scotland on SBS. He gave IMO Alexander II fairly short shrift but on further reading of David Ross's Scotland History Of A Nation, Ross claimed him to be an energetic Social reformer. Both interesting historians but differing views.
Scottish history and differing views... Well I'll be... whoever would have thought :eek::p;).

On some digs in Scotland people turn up just to make sure archaeologists don't salt their findings.
In fact if we start arguing Scottish history here mods be warned, Christian V Atheist debate will seem like a schoolboys undercard bout in comparison.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

John

Verve Clique Oh!
Joined
May 20, 2006
Posts
11,565
Likes
5,605
Location
In the Clique.
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
#12
Scottish history and differing views... Well I'll be... whoever would have thought :eek::p;).

On some digs in Scotland people turn up just to make sure archaeologists don't salt their findings.
In fact if we start arguing Scottish history here mods be warned, Christian V Atheist debate will seem like a schoolboys undercard bout in comparison.

And I made a mistake in the previous post. I meant James I and yeah not keen on a Ranger v Celtic debate myself:D.
 
Top Bottom