Scotland's history

[Big hughie]

Justine I know the other thread was closed but this programme is coming on BBC soon
http://news.scotsman.com/uk/39Wha39s-like-us39-Historian-questions.3854370.jp

As my own opinion I agree totally with Professor Devine ..why on earth use a archeologist and one with well known political views to present this Better with Prof Devine himself
Beeg Hugheeeeeeee

[justine]

Hi cheers Big Hueeeeeee....I have just noticed this thread..I am in agreement here, Why can they not use a historian and not an archeologist for this.....I liked the coast series, but unfortunately the presenter did my head in a fter a while, but the series was fantastic..I will keep my eye on this ...I did not notice if they sated a day when it would be starting.....Maybe it will help with my studies of scottish history....

[Dusty]

Why on earth would Prof. Devine turn down a position on the programme's advisory board and then criticize from the sidelines I wonder?

I have watched Neil Oliver's presentations on the Top Ten, Two Men in a Trench and Coast and have enjoyed all of the series.

I was privileged to be involved with the Two Men in a Trench Battle of Banockburn episode and found both Neil Oliver and Tony Pollard to be extremely well informed about the history of the battle and the associated events. Neil Oliver was able to point out in the field how the battlefield had physically changed over the centuries so highlighting the difficulties faced by the armies at the time.

His presentation style may be percieved as "patronising" by a fellow academic, but I would venture to suggest that he has an easy manner and infectious enthusiasm which might encourage people to watch and learn about the history of the nation whereas the "dry" academic approach might not suit the casually interested who could therefore switch off and loose out.

Just my opinion though.

[Big hughie]

Dusty Like you I thought Two men in a trench was excellent as was Coast but my point was why was a historian not used ??..the proof will be in the programme itself though lets hope its a goodie
Beeg Hugheeee

[Valerie Campbell]

At least they're doing something I suppose. Scottish history has been laid by the roadside for too long. During the 80s I, like many others I'm sure, collected The Story of Scotland magazines because I knew so little of my own country's past. I knew more about the American Revolution and the Russian Revolutions than I did the Jacobites or the Union. In my opinion, you have to understand the Scotland's past to understand Scotland and how she ticks today. Then I would say that wouldn't I?!!

[northener]

....I have watched Neil Oliver's presentations on the Top Ten, Two Men in a Trench and Coast and have enjoyed all of the series.

I was privileged to be involved with the Two Men in a Trench Battle of Banockburn episode and found both Neil Oliver and Tony Pollard to be extremely well informed about the history of the battle and the associated events. Neil Oliver was able to point out in the field how the battlefield had physically changed over the centuries so highlighting the difficulties faced by the armies at the time.

His presentation style may be percieved as "patronising" by a fellow academic, but I would venture to suggest that he has an easy manner and infectious enthusiasm which might encourage people to watch and learn about the history of the nation whereas the "dry" academic approach might not suit the casually interested who could therefore switch off and loose out....

.

It's a more common problem than you think. When I lived in England I was involved with British Civil War re-enactment societies.

On the whole, we spent years being looked down upon by Academia as being enthusiastic but ignorant types. The 'serious' Historians tended to ignore the masses of research carried out by many of our members in all aspects of C17th life in Britain.

It is only in the last few years that they have had to accept that history and archeaology are not solely the preserve of Post-Graduates and in fact, in many instances it has been members of groups like ours and amateur archaeologists who have moved our understanding forward.

An extension of this is TV programmes such as 'Two men in a Trench' or 'Time Team'. They are still looked down upon (and even sneered at) by some academics but provide accessible history and archaeology for the general public - which can only be a good thing.

More power to Neil Oliver & co.

[justine]

It's a more common problem than you think. When I lived in England I was involved with British Civil War re-enactment societies.

On the whole, we spent years being looked down upon by Academia as being enthusiastic but ignorant types. The 'serious' Historians tended to ignore the masses of research carried out by many of our members in all aspects of C17th life in Britain.

It is only in the last few years that they have had to accept that history and archeaology are not solely the preserve of Post-Graduates and in fact, in many instances it has been members of groups like ours and amateur archaeologists who have moved our understanding forward.

An extension of this is TV programmes such as 'Two men in a Trench' or 'Time Team'. They are still looked down upon (and even sneered at) by some academics but provide accessible history and archaeology for the general public - which can only be a good thing.

More power to Neil Oliver & co.


Maybe this has alot to do with accademic prefering to sit behind a desk and read about history iinstead of going out into the field......I really enjoyed the two men in a trech, i got a lot of information from then...I do find sometimes the accademic world confusing and sometimes its easier to understand when presented by historians who love what they do.....

[Rheghead]

I like Neil Oliver's infectious enthusiasm for history. He presents his programmes with a dynamism that is sadly rare on today's television.