History magazine feb edition

Winstanley College

History Magazine February 2015 Edition

1

Contents: Editorial ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..3 Super Mario and the Communist Conspiracy…………………………………………………………………………….4-6 Verney visits Winstanley………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….7-9 Aiden the Oxford Chronicler……………………………………………………………………………………………………….10-13 Thinking about the Holocaust…………………………………………………………………………………………………….14-15 King Sejong the Great…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..16-18 How to Ensure you’re Drowning in Gold: the Roman Guide………………………………………………...19-23 Then and Now……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….24-26 The Woodvilles………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………27-29 The Cold War…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………30-32 Mahatma Gandhi: The Power of Peace……………………………………………………………………………………..33-36 An Interview with Richard Blake……………………………………………………………………………………………….37-43 What’s happening in the History Society………………………………………………………………………………………44 Meet the History Society……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………45 Please note that any views or opinions expressed in this magazine are the views of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Winstanley College, or its History Society.

2

Editorial: “Study the past, if you would define the future.” Confucius Hello and welcome to the February of the two major parties. edition of the Winstanley History Soci- In college, as A2 coursework begins ety Magazine! we have a review of Civil Rights lecturWe barely into the second month of er Kevern Verney’s visit, as well as an the year and yet 2015 is already guar- excellent account of an Oxbridge inanteeing its place in future history terview by successful applicant Aidan books.

Lea for any AS’ considering applying Ideological conflict continues to divide next year. the world, with the tragic shootings at We also have brilliant articles on the Charlie Hebdo headquarters In greed in the Roman Republic, the KoParis and ISIS kidnappings in Iraq. rean monarchy, and the communist conspiracy behind the Super Mario In Europe itself, the question of game to name a few! whether the election of Syriza in Greece is a triumph of people power or a harbinger of economic uncertainty remains unanswered, with the fate of the Euro hanging in the balance.

A massive congratulations also to our competition winners Megan Walsh, Bailey Blackburn, and Dana McGibbon for their fascinating articles, and In the UK campaigning for the General thank you to Fred Longworth and Standish High Schools for taking part!

Election has begun, with the Tories pedalling their “Road to Recovery” Enjoy! and Labour the struggling NHS. How- Madeleine McDonagh and ever, the most interesting factor in Sally Dickens. this election may perhaps be the role Editors. of third parties such as UKIP, the Greens and the SNP in splitting the vote and challenging the dominance 3

Super Mario and the Communist conspiracy...

He’s one of the most recognisable mascots out there, known the world over as that Italian guy with a slightly bizarre taste for mushrooms. Some have even hailed him as the greatest thing ever to happen to gaming. So, what if I was to tell you that Super Mario could potentially be a piece of proCommunist propaganda? Let’s stop Stalin and examine the evidence, shall we?

Russian troops whilst all this was happening.

All this came to a head on the 7th March (or 22nd February, as Russia was still using the Julian calendar at this point), when the February Revolution overthrew the Tsar and virtually quashed all imperial authority within the country. What followed was a period of further unrest under the Provisional Government, which only ended in the October Revolution of 25th October (or 7th November in First, let’s give ourselves a bit of context. The the Gregorian calendar), when Lenin’s BolFirst World War was an extremely difficult shevik Party took power. So now that’s out time for the Russian people, as wartime inof the way, we can now explore this initially flation caused food prices to skyrocket. bizarre claim of Mario as a Communist symWorkers, however, saw no such increase in pathiser. their wages, meaning that no-one could A good place to start is with the character’s afford to feed themselves. Poor working design. Have you ever wondered why Mario conditions, low wages, and hours of work which granted them nothing; it’s not difficult is dressed in red? The common argument is to see why the people were angry. And they that it contrasted with the blue background directed their anger towards Tsar Nicholas II, of the original NES game. This would make sense if red and blue were opposite each the monarch who was actually away with 4

other on the colour wheel, but it isn’t; orange is. In fact, orange has just as many (if not more) shades of red in the NES colour palette. When you compare how much orange was used in the game to how much red was used, you see a huge contrast. Then there’s Mario’s Fire Flower suit, making him don a red and white uniform when active.

Communism was also strongly associated with the colour red, with the red and white being the two colours of the Bolshevik flag.

With regards to Mario’s actual appearance, isn’t it a little odd that his hat seems to sport a similar design to that worn by Stalin? Perhaps; it is a bit odd that both seem to have a circle with a signature design on them. What about his moustache though? Is it also a coincidence that both Stalin and Mario have similar facial hair? Maybe, but there are more elements which seem to point to this theory being true…

Let’s move on to some of the recurring characters and traits in the games. The main one to look at is Wario, initially created as the anti-Mario. The two things he’s known for are; being fat and being greedy. Now if that isn’t a walking American stereotype, what is? Wario is consistently portrayed as the fat bourgeoisie antithesis to the proletariat Mario. Whilst we’re on the topic, what was Mario originally? A plumber, who started off as a carpenter; working class, manual labour positions which define members of the Communist Party, meaning Mario would fit the mould more than well. Moreover, what is the goal in each game? To overthrow a 5

king (Bowser being the King Koopa); and the goal of the Russian Revolution was to also overthrow a king (Tsar Nicholas II). And at the end of each level, Mario tears down a flag to raise his own. In the original games, this was a red star on a white background; the red star being a common symbol for Communism, more specifically for the Red Army. Then, there are the mushrooms he eats, which appear to be based on the Amanita Muscaria. Not only does it look like the mushrooms from the games, but it also acts like them too, being used at many points throughout history for its ability to cause hallucinations. Now, where is this particular mushroom located? Siberia, the eastern half of Russia. Still not convinced? Alright, then there’s another point to consider before you dismiss this argument as lies.

This argument lies in the form of the game’s development. If the series was developed anywhere west of the Iron Curtain, there would have been no chance of any left wing leanings. But, as we all know, Nintendo is located in Japan. Now, whilst Japan may not be a Communist state, there was a Communist party maintaining a strong presence in its elections from the 1950s onwards. This party was actually at its strongest during the 1970s and 1980s, when the Mario games would have initially been developed. Statistics show that, of the 50million votes cast at elections during that time span, around 10% (or 5million) went to the Japanese Communist Party. With this in mind, is it really hard to believe that one or two of the indi-

could have subtly worked in some of their political beliefs? That’s all it takes, sometimes.Now, I should probably go on record to state that there are some huge, gaping holes in this theory. I would be blind not to notice them. Firstly, whilst you do overthrow King Koopa (or Bowser, if you prefer) in the games, you also install another aristocracy in his place, supervised by Princess Peach. So Mario isn’t that much of a people’s plumber after all. And it would be difficult to link the mushrooms to Marxist teachings, even if they just so happen to be located in Russia. Regardless, it does make you wonder each time you look at the games; is Mario Communist? Maybe he is, maybe he isn’t; I’ll leave that one up for debate. What is certain is that I’ve probably ruined someone’s childhood upon them reading this, and for that, and the atrocious pun at the beginning, I apologize.

(Seriously, I can’t even justify why I came up with that)

By Thomas Baxendale.

6

Verney Visits Winstanley

Civil Rights expert Kevern Verney recently inspired our ‘mixed’ and ‘modern’ historians into action on their A2 coursework with an intriguing presentation on the role of Martin Luther King, with direct comparison to the actions of the Federal Government.

the field, whilst exposing those considering taking History on to degree level to a university-style lecture from someone from the very top of academic historians. He focused particularly on the role of the presidents at the time at which King was in his prime, JFK and Lyndon Johnson, and raised the argument that whilst King was fundamental to Verney, a professor from Edge Hill Universi- the progress of the movement, the circumstances within which he found himself conty, studied History at Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge, before going on to do a Masters tributed hugely to the concessions made in favour of greater racial equality in the USA. degree at the University of Keele in ‘U.S. History and Institutions’. He has taken an active The film ‘Selma’ was released in America last year and is due to be released in the UK role in the academic world of Civil Rights, authoring various studies and books on the shortly, and so Verney used this as a starting point for the presentation, as the film faced Civil Rights Movement, with focuses on both backlash in America for being overly critical what is coined the ‘Short’ Civil Rights Moveof Johnson’s stance on Civil Rights. . ‘Selma’, ment (1955-1968) as well as the ‘Long’ Civil according to Verney, seems to suggest that Rights Movement (1877-1954).

Johnson held back on putting Civil Rights legislation through Congress as far as possiHis visit was to provide all those studying the Civil Rights for their A2 level coursework ble, whereas Verney believes that Johnson with the views of a renowned specialist in 7

was in favour of progressing Civil Rights and racial equality, though he did not credit him to the extent that Hillary Clinton appeared to when speaking publicly on Civil Rights in 2008. Clinton, like ‘Selma’, came in for criticism as a result.

jure or de facto, and yet fight for democracy in Eastern Europe was rather hypocritical: “Just as the US tried to flag up embarrassing incidents in Russia…the Russian response was ‘who are you to call us?’”

The ‘Presidential Action’ of Kennedy and Johnson were broken down for comparison into four main sections by Verney in his presentation, using Kennedy’s 1960 Presidential election pledge on how to combat Civil Rights as a basis: 1) Presidential Leadership in Congress; 2) Executive Action, and; 3) Moral Leadership of the Nation. Verney importantly highlighted how despite Johnson ostensibly achieving more in passing the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the 1965 Voting Rights Act, and the 1968 Civil Rights Act, Kennedy paved the way for such legislation, and the circumstances in which Johnson implemented them were unequivocally crucial to their implementation as law.

The general view that Verney conveyed was not so much to focus on a particular individual, movement, or group, in searching for the linchpin for the progression in the 1960s, but actually to take a step back from it and observe the whole picture: consider the circumstances in which the progress was made. Yes, individuals such as King were decisive and important; but equally as important was the fact that King emerged in the height of the Cold War, meaning Civil Rights ‘became an issue of foreign policy’, as Verney himself put it – perhaps something that would force more action than the issue of Civil Rights on its own. He pointed out that for the US to repress civilians, be it de 8

Verney also incorporated a number of historians views on the Civil Rights Movement, enabling the A2 students to get a general overview of the opinions held by the scholars whose articles they have been trawling over in class and at home. He also introduced the thoughts of other historians previously un-encountered by the students, such as Niven, who claims in ‘Politics of Injustice’ (2003) that Kennedy, as president, missed an opportunity to further progress Civil Rights. He contrasted that with the view of Hart, who argues that he had no option but to be cautious due to a narrow victory in the 1960 Presidential election, and the fact that the Democratic Party were divided on the issue of Civil Rights. This introduction of new historians and summary of those previously studied certainly helped myself in understanding the positions of different historians, as I had feared – having read so many articles on the debate on the importance of King to the Movement – that I would confuse historians’ views, or potentially misinterpret what each historian says!

The focus however was not just on Kennedy, King and Johnson. At the end of his presentation, Verney took the opportunity to raise socio-economic changes prior to 1955 that perhaps changed the demographic of the USA and thus altered the path of the search for Civil Rights. He pointed to the Great Migration, for example, which ultimately changed the voting patterns, with AfricanAmericans legally able to vote in the North,

unlike the South. As a As a result, in targeting votes, political parties were forced to become sensitive to the issue of Civil Rights in order to obtain the votes of the newly arriving African-Americans in the North. Another example he highlighted was FDR’s ‘New Deal’ of the 1930s which changes the outlook of the Supreme Court, bringing about American legal realism. The struggles of the African-Americans in society therefore became higher in profile and began to affect the agenda of the US political and legal system.

those eras and topics, he said that with the breadth of topics covered by many History university courses, you should make the most of it while you can!

By Harry Griffiths.

This is just the tip of the iceberg of what Verney presented to the students in his lecture, with many figures and statistics provided throughout – which will without doubt aid the writing of coursework. Verney also kindly provided Elaine with his PowerPoint, which was then redistributed to the students with his consent, and so students were able to just listen to him speak, as opposed to being scribes and scrawling away at paper trying to not miss a thing on the board.

I had the fortunate opportunity of spending some time with Verney upon his visit to college and spoke to him about Civil Rights and studying History. Perhaps the most memorable thing he told me was that those going on to study History at university was to broaden your historical horizons, claiming that many of his fellow students when he was at Cambridge stuck to whatever they studied at A-level, or studied simply British and European history of the 20th Century.

Whilst there’s nothing wrong with studying 9

Aiden the Oxford chronicler

As a historian, I’ll try to give a balanced account of my Oxford experience. For the same reason, I’ll also acknowledge that receiving an offer (don’t ask me why that happened) might have positively influenced my reflections on the process. In defence of my positivity however, I can say that I had concluded before leaving Oxford to get the train home that I was very glad to have had the experience of the interview process regardless of the outcome, so my reflections I think are credible. I should also disclaim that my experience could represent a typical one. Each applicant seems to have a unique experience, in historical terms they range in enjoyment from a Roman orgy to the Black Death. Consequently I can’t offer my experience as a representative one, only an account of my personal perspective which might be reassuring to Winstanley’s future Oxford applicants or of interest to anyone 10

who wonders what goes on behind those ancient and closed doors.

It was only as I stepped through the threshold of Brasenose’s huge wooden doors that I could begin to accept the reality of the surreal situation. Having found my way through the city in the dark and rain, I arrived at the porter’s office soaking wet. I collected my key and was shown to my room by one of the friendly students who had stayed the extra few days to help applicants though the interview process. I was there only long enough to drop my bags before I was led through several of the cosy courtyards to the junior common room (JCR). It was packed so I negotiated my way around the pool table and groups of chatting applicants and students to view the notice board for history applicants. There was one of these on the wall for each of the subjects.

They listed the interviewers and times for everyone’s interviews, I had one the next morning and one the day after that. After noting these I decided I’d go back to my room, as having only arrived about 9pm (my train from Wigan had been delayed an hour) and having already done the whole day in college, I was quite tired. I did some last minute reading and instructed my alarm to wake me up early the next morning.

cent hall; Brasenose was no exception. The room was huge, with a tall ceiling, adorned with portraits of the college’s benefactors and deans. Its floor was a dark wood, like its panelled walls and long tables which stretched the length of it away from the door towards the top table which was perpendicular to the rest. As there was no planned seating and the near tables were already filled with chattering people by the time I got up, the top table was where I nervously placed my tray and sat down opposite The next morning, I showered (I had an en suite) the college’s eponymous door knocker, hanging then only had to stroll down the winding wooden staircase leading from my bedroom to the entranc- pride of place on the wall above the top table. Luckes to the canteen and dining hall. It seems the luck ily for me it was other applicants sitting there, rather than the senior academic intellectuals who I that had landed me an interview struck again, as I imagined usually sat here during term time. School found that my accommodation was one of the rowing club jackets, talk of gap years in Tanzania more luxurious rooms. Mine had a separate bedand hearing lists of mutual acquaintances from room, living area and bathroom, right above the ‘school’ in London did little to contradict the prehall and with great views of the court yard and conceived ideas I had arrived with but this first imsome of the city’s recognisable buildings. It was nice to get a look in the big rooms but even if I get pression was challenged over the course of my stay as I found that all kinds of people had applied, and the grades to go, I’ll be avoiding the costliest rooms. Had I been put somewhere else for the in- all were friendly and interesting, united by the comterview, I wouldn’t have minded since others who mon experience and anxiety of interview which alshared showers between rooms managed fine, and ways offered a place to start a conversation. those staying in accommodation off-site were only After breakfast I had a couple of hours until intera few minutes away and surrounded by other stu- view which I spent reading over my personal statedents. The college provided 3 meals a day, including ment and written work so that I had answers for the option of cooked dinner and breakfast and dur- potential questions around things I’d mentioned ing the day we had a packed lunch- all of which was and I was very glad to have taken printed copies of each as well as the books I’d mentioned in each. paid for by the college. Both mornings I ate a full About half an hour from my interview I went down English breakfast- one for each day of the year to the JCR to wait. I was relieved to see the other would be reason enough to apply to Oxford. applicants dressed casually as I was. I’d taken a suit The feeling of entering the hall was redolent of the jacket as well as the shirts and jeans I intended to first time watching Harry Potter walk into Hogwear to avoid being the odd one out either way. warts. Interestingly, the film studio in which that There was only one or two in suits and just one in a scene was shot was only built as Christchurch- one flamboyant purple waistcoat with a chain dangling of Oxford’s more famous colleges- wouldn’t allow from his pocket that looked suspiciously like a pockthe filming in their hall, they did film the staircase et watch but these were the exceptions rather than leading up to it (though this doesn’t actually move the rule. I was glad it was so relaxed; I was wearing in real life.) Most colleges across the university shoes, jeans and a shirt as if I was going out for dinseem to have common features- courtyards with ner and felt comfortable. rarely trodden lawns, an old chapel and a magnifi11

Soon after, a student showed me up some stairs and waited with me outside until another applicant emerged and I was invited inside a minute or so later. The room was fairly normal- small, carpeted and bright with a book case or two. It transpired that this interview was based around my personal statement. I was interviewed by a pair of historians in each of my interviews. I sat down in an armchair facing two others, occupied by my interviewers-two men in this one- who welcomed me and made me feel very at ease, thanking me for my personal statement which one said was very interesting.

They used it as a springboard to launch questions although that didn’t mean they were any easier to answer. For example, one observed that I was an ‘outdoorsman’ but this didn’t stop my being initially surprised by a question containing the phrase ‘geographical determinism.’ After this they moved on to a few questions which I later verified had been put to all the interviewees including a request to describe the process of the transition from monarchy to republic. In all it lasted about 20 minutes which went really quick. It ended with the opportunity for me to ask a question. Given that we’d discussed the causes for the expansion of Rome, I asked them how they would explain it. They agreed it was a very ‘Webarian’ question but then proceeded not to answer it. I felt this interview went all right but I spent the time afterwards considering all the things I could have said better and looking up what ‘Webarian’ means! I think everyone probably does this after the time has gone, like after an exam, and other candidates agreed.

tails of my essay on Henry II and the great rebellion.

This part of the interview took up the majority of the time and was conducted by a lady who took over from her colleague, a man whose role had been to initially ask me to describe my history class and the methods of our teaching. He said he knew Winstanley and this reassured me. I learned at least one of my interviewers came from another Oxford college which shows they work with one another, and you aren’t necessarily guaranteed to be interviewed only by staff from the college you applied to although the fact that one of the professors at my college was away at a conference may also have played a part.

Given that each interview took only 20 minutes each over the course of two days meant there was a lot of free time which was divided between the JCR and going about Oxford. The JCR was like a large living room with many sofas and a big TV at one end and a pool table at the other. It was always buzzing. There were board games going on at every table and a film on the television especially in the evening. It was impossible to be unsociable because if you stood alone for too long a student would talk to you or invite you to join a game. It was good and the students lived up to their claim to be the ‘happiest college.’ They also occasionally announced impromptu trips to various locations: ice cream parlours, deer parks, ice rinks which were a good opportunity to get a look around the city and talk to people. I was also glad to meet up with the other Winstanley students being interviewed around the university for sightseeing and drinks. It was comforting to talk to the people who I’d preTalking with other history applicants later, I found pared with for months. Although at first I thought a that half had been interviewed around their persystem of conducting 20 minute interviews over a 4 sonal statement and general history and the rest day stay seemed inefficient, especially compared to about their written work. Having already done one Cambridge’s all in one day interviews, but it made of these, I knew what to expect the next day in my the experience much more pleasant and meant I second interview, so I read over my submitted eswas much more relaxed by the time I was being insay in preparation. Sure enough, when I was invited terviewed for the 2nd and 3rd time. into a similar room the next day and seated on a sofa opposite two armchairs, I was asked questions regarding the feudal system and various other de12

It also allowed me to get a real feel for the university and a taste of what it would be like to study here.

If I put aside ambitions for a place, I was simply grateful for a free stay in Oxford and the chance to discuss historical ideas.

By Aiden Lea.

13

A Discussion of the Holocaust

When we think of “the Holocaust” what do we think of? A Shoah of the Jewish people of Eastern Europe, and the systematic killing of millions of Jews in the name of ideology.

The grisly idea of working the “excess” population of the newly occupied Lebensraum to death and when that failed, the use of Zyklon B gas was used to kill at least 1 million Jews in Auschwitz alone. This mechanical killing was largely ignored until the 1990’s as Lawrence Rees points out, because Soviet censorship addressed, rightly or wrongly, the Holocaust dead simply as “victims of fascism” heaped alongside the toll of the 13-20 million Soviet citizens killed in the brutal Nazi occupation of 1941-44 and the significance of Auschwitz in the Nazi “machine” was largely ignored at the time due to Majdanek being similar in its techniques of murder.

14

Yet, time was also needed to truly appreciate the scale of what happened under Nazi occupation; for a generation who hadn’t experienced the fear of Fascism for people to realise that the memory of such an event must and should be kept alive at all costs, with education preventing another ideological murder spree. Often it takes time for events to change from being current events to a horrific past one, think how once we saw the Iraq war as a current event in the news but now it has begun to be analysed and in a retrospective sense we now have a greater understanding of what happened.

However, when we look closer we see that the events of the 1930’s and 1940’s were not unique in their brutality: before Hitler even started writing Mein Kampf numerous persecutions of Jews from the Roman and Medieval eras to the Tsars of Russia had shown that anti-Semitism was not

exclusively German or Nazi in fact. . So too had “genocides” occurred; the British invented the concentration camp to “deal with” the Dutch Boer settlers in South Africa and in Armenia during the First World War millions were killed without any real outside recognition.

Rather more terrifying is the prospect that the world has learned nothing in its behaviour since the Holocaust, the Mau Mau uprising was put down with brutal force perhaps even not dissimilar to the reaction to the Warsaw uprising. Cambodia and the Khmer Rouge too have claimed countless lives, many of whom were highly educated, leaving the country still reeling to this day.

Darfur, Sudan, an already poor area of the Sahel region of Africa has been ravaged by the Janjaweed and government fighters since the 1970’s (perhaps even comparable to the joint efforts of the SA and SS in the Second World War). Even more recently, the killing of Christians, Jews and non-Sharia Muslims by so called ISIL mirrors ideological killing on religious and cultural grounds.

Common in all of these examples is a response globally of disgust and sometimes action but we have not seen another world war. Why not?

gium” and you get the primary reason for Allied involvement. To not brush all the Allies as evil it must be pointed out that most outside occupied territory knew little of the horrors inside, and many, like Ralph Milliband were not believed in the UK when they told of what the Nazis were doing to the persecuted.

Secondly, there is somewhat of a dilemma, we cannot infringe on free speech even if it promotes the killing of a social group as a scapegoat as that undermined the mere principles of a liberal democracy. Yet it seems also a contradiction not to stop hate speech especially concerning the promotion of genocide yet that is the overall importance of Holocaust memorial, to educate society so that they will intervene when they see it done around them.

Overall, despite the world not moving away from the idea of ideological killing of innocent civilians in practice, our idea of it being wrong has developed. The addition of the Human Rights Act and Universal Declaration of Human Rights into legislation and the Zeitgeist has made a more aware public who care and can find out using modern technology when events happen like in the Middle East currently, and can learn about them almost instantly with the help of the internet, Firstly the Second World War started much something we didn’t have 70 years ago. Yet as the first one did. Not a crusade for the still we are faced with the looming prospect lives of the countless Jews, homosexuals, Soof the holocaust being forgotten and alongcialists, Communists, Gypsies, Slavs and disaside it the rightful fear we have of it occurbled people killed or reduced to virtual slavring again. ery. Trade the name Belgium for Poland in the phrase: “the war started because of Ger- By Cameron Fleming. man expansionism and the invasion of Bel15

King Sejong the Great/세종대왕

King Sejong was born as Yi Do to King Taejong and Queen Wongyeong of the Joseon Dynasty on May 7th 1397 and he was the third of four sons. His succession to the throne was surprising to say the least, according to Confucian principles the eldest son, Prince Yangnyeong, should have inherited the throne however at court his behaviour proved rude and aberrant, many believe that he behaved this way because he believed that Sejong should be King in his place, as during his childhood, Sejong impressed many with his wisdom and curiosity.

Also the second son, Prince Hyoryeong, removed himself from succession by becoming a Buddhist monk. When Sejong was only 12 years old, he was named ‘Crown Prince Chungnyeong’ and ten years later King Taejong would abdicate the throne in favour of Chungnyeong, who later took the throne name Sejong.

Goryeo Kingdom and created Joseon, in this coup d’état he was assisted by his fifth son Yi Bang-Won (later King Taejong), who later expected to be named Crown Prince, however a court scholar who feared and hated Yi Bang-Won persuaded King Taejo to name the eight son, Yi Bang-Seok as heir to the throne instead. Whilst King Taejo was mourning the death of his wife in 1398, this scholar planned to assassinate all the sons bar the eighth, in order to secure the Crown Prince’s place, as well as his own. After hearing rumours of this plot, Yi Bang-Won raised his army and attacked the capital, killing two of his brothers as well as said evil scholar.

King Taejo, horrified that his sons were turning against each other in what became known as the First Strife of Princes, named his second son, Yi Bang-Gwa as Crown Prince and in 1398 abdicated the throne and Yi Bang-Gwa became known as King Jeongjong, the second Joseon ruler.

As mentioned before Sejong’s ascension to the throne was unusually bloodless and peaceful, why? It all began with the Strife of the Princes… (Dreamy flashback music as we16 stare off into the distance). In 1392, Sejong’s

However, peace didn’t last for long as come 1400 the Second Strife of Princes broke out when Yi Bang-Won and his brother Yi BangGan began to fight. Yi Bang-Won triumphed and as a result exiled his brother and family and executed all of his supporters. Consequently, the feeble King Jeongjong relinquished his claim to the throne after merely two years in favour of his brother Yi BangWon, who became known as King Taejong, the third Joseon ruler and Sejong’s father.

King Taejong wasn’t the nicest of rulers, he executed a number of his own supporters if he felt they became too powerful, including all of his wife’s brothers and King Sejong’s father-in-law and brothers-in-law. It seems his experience in battle against brothers and willingness to execute family members, likely persuaded his first two sons to step aside and allow the favourite son to become King.

King Sejong is considered one of the most effective and powerful leaders of Korea. For the first four years of his reign he guided Joseon military planning as he had always been an effective military strategist and leader. He was incredibly intelligent, he loved sciences and technology and even introduced a number of organizational and technological improvements to the kingdom’s military forces. For example, although gunpowder had been used for centuries, Sejong encouraged the expansion into different form of warfare, like cannons and mortars as well as rocket-like “fire arrows”, that basically worked in a similar way to modern RPG’s (…Cool...)

Just one year into his reign, in May 1419, King Sejong dispatched the Gihae Eastern Expedition to the seas off Korea's east coast. This military force set out to confront the Japanese pirates or wako who operated 17

out of Tsushima Island, harrying shipping, stealing trade goods, and kidnapping Korean and Chinese subjects.

By September of that year, the Korean troops had defeated the pirates, killing nearly 150 of them, and rescuing almost 150 Chinese kidnap victims and 8 Koreans.

This expedition would be important later in Sejong's reign, as in 1443, the daimyo of Tsushima pledged obedience to the King of Joseon Korea in the Treaty of Gyehae, in exchange for which he received preferential trading rights with the Korean mainland.

King Sejong's queen was Soheon of the Shim clan, with whom he would have a total of eight sons and two daughters. He also had three Royal Noble Consorts, Consort Hye, Consort Yeong, and Consort Shin, who bore him three sons, one son and six sons.

With eighteen princes running around and representing different clans on their mothers' sides basically ensured that succession could be a bloodbath. However, King Sejong was a Confucian scholar and named his sickly eldest son Munjong as Crown Prince.

King Sejong delighted in science and technology, and supported a number of inventions or refinements of previous technologies. These developments he supported would prove invaluable to the Korean public as it made books more widely available for the educated Koreans, many being history books of the Goryeo kingdom, deeds for followers of Confucius to follow and techniques for farmers on how to produce more. He also took an interest in music, devising an elegant notation system for representing Korean and Chinese music, and encouraging instrument-makers to improve the designs of various musical instruments.

In 1420, King Sejong created the Hall of Worthies, an academy of the top twenty Confucian scholars, their duties included studying the ancient laws, rites of China and previous Korean dynasties, compiled historical texts and also lectured the King and Crown Prince on Confucian classics.

assassinated and then took over. After two years, Sejo forced Danjong to abdicate the throne in favour of himself. Six court officials however, planned to restore Danjong to power in 1456 but Sejo discovered the scheme, assassinated the officials and had his 16 year-old nephew burned to death so that he could no longer challenge Sejo’s King Sejong invented many things in his time claim to the throne. Thanks Uncle… as ruler, all for the benefit of his people, however the one invention that he is most Despite the successional mess that resulted remembered for today is Hangul, the Korean from King Sejong's death, he is remembered alphabet. In 1443, King Sejong and eight as the wisest and most capable ruler in Koother advisers created an alphabetic system rean history. Today, the king is remembered to accurately represent Korean language and as Sejong the Great, one of only two Korean sounds and sentence structure. As a result, kings honoured with that title. Sejong's face they came up with 14 consonants and 10 appears on the largest denomination of vowels, which arranged in certain combinaSouth Korea's currency, the 10,000 won bill. tions mimicked the sounds of spoken KoreHis accomplishments in science, political an. After announcing the creation of the altheory, military arts and literature mark phabet in 1446, King Sejong encouraged all Sejong as one of the most innovative kings of his subject to learn and use it, naturally in Asia or the world. there was backlash in the beginning as there were many among scholars who believed it By Sophie Scott. to be vulgar, however, it spread like wildfire among the vast population. There are early texts that claim a clever person can learn Hangul in a few hours, and a stupid person in ten days.

Unfortunately, King Sejong’s health began to deteriorate and after suffering from diabetes and other health problems he became blind at the age of 50 and passed away on May 18th, 1450 at the age of 53. As predicted his eldest son Munjong did not survive him long after just two years on the throne he died leaving his 12 year old son Danjong to rule, he was advised by two scholar regents.

This first Joseon experiment in Confucianstyle primogeniture did not last long, however. As in 1453 King Sejong’s second son, Danjong’s uncle, Sejo, had the two regents 18

How to ensure you’re drowning in gold: the Roman guide

By Emma Porter.

Step 1: Be bequeathed a Kingdom.

What?

Step 2: Get Gold-Sickness (i.e. greedy).

What do you mean I’ve left you hanging?

Step 3: Tax the hell out of the kingdoms un- What do you mean you want to know more?

What do you mean you want me to stop der your command. saying what do you mean?

Step 4: Have the kingdoms rebel once OK, OK, just for you, I’ll continue and tell you’ve tried it on once too many times. you about the sort of, maybe, start of the And finally, the big one, step five, the one end for the Roman Republic. I’ll tell you you’ve all been waiting for, the one you about as much as I can cram into 1,000want me to shut up for so you can actually 1,500 words. Sorry if it’s jumpy, but I try my read the step and not this big long sentence best.

I’m making you read for fun so I can introJust keep it to your chest. I don’t want peoduce it and use up some of my words (two ple knowing I’ve gone soft. birds with one coin, *winks*) Step 5: Have molten gold forced down your throat until you’ve drowned.

Let me take you back, back millennia, to approx. 133BC.

Thank you for reading.

We are in the Roman Republic – a state where there is no one indisputable leader and they’re ruled by a senate. The rich enjoy the benefits of freedom and the poor just carry on their lives acknowledging the

. . .

19

change, but prevented from dabbling in the perfidious, perplexing, power-grabbing, paradoxes of Senate politics. There are provinces under Roman rule, too scared to fight back and just bowing down to their scare tactics.

ing in Roman politics - though it gave you the opportunity to get involved- the only way to climb the political ladder was …to achieve. Like constant A-levels, over and over, forever and ever and you never actually achieve the ultimate goal (the Romans But our story starts when one of these bow- liked glory and achievement - they just didn’t like people achieving too much). ing “royal poodles” as Holland calls them, starts being too obsequious and decides to There were some do-gooders in the senate, donate a kingdom to the Roman Republic in the radicals who thought the unexpected his will. That’s right. A kingdom. God, some boon should be spent helping the disadvantaged people in society and for his own sopeople have too much money. cial reforms, for example - Tiberius Gracchus In 133 BC, Attalus III, the king of Pergamum, was his name, and social reform was his a Greek city which controlled the majority of game. (And I know I'm being lame, you only West Turkey, decided to make a big show have yourself to blame.) But he didn’t get and give his entire kingdom to the Romans. his way.

Thought it would be the perfect gift, didn’t They murdered him instead. Carrying on. he?

The majority of the senate weren’t as radical as poor Tiberius, as they clung to their He has no respect for GOOD ROMAN VALold traditionalist views, believing it would UES, THE IDJIT! sort itself out. They did nothing with the Pergamum was reportedly rich - super rich - kingdom to start. Imposing direct rule on streets paved with gold rich! All that gold Pergamum seemed very...embarrassing to just sitting there, on offer for the opportun- the Romans. It assumed they couldn’t be istic Roman. But to the traditionalist Rocleverer at tricking gold out of foreign kingmans, i.e. the majority of the senate whose doms. But, eventually, the concern was decision it was to deal with the bequest, thrust in their faces again when Pergamum gold came hand in hand with moral corrup- descended into anarchy. Once that happened, they sent in commissioners after sevtion. eral years of campaigning (fighting) to conThey couldn’t just send a thank you card, trol them, and maintain the traditional rules could they? and regulations of the previous kings of PerSo the senate squabbled over their newgamum. found fortune. The senate, if you are uniformed, was the best of the best of the Roman Republic. Your family counted for nothWRONG!

20

Remember that. It’s important.

he pushed forward a law to make Pergamum subject to tax.

Because that’s what allows those moneygrabbing Roman-style capitalists in.

It went through.

Through the decree of the senate after the anarchy, Pergamum was to be ruled by oldstyle Pergamum King Governance. And that meant tax. Tax. Tax.Tax.Tax. Taxxy-Taxxy-Tax.

It was a bit like a Roman Gold-rush - taxfarming contracts were soon created with only the wealthy being able to afford them, and only then when they pooled their resources. Shares were offered, directors Tax. elected, the Romans essentially making a It was a surprisingly new concept to the Ro- business out of tax collecting. These busimans, using it as the main way to extort nessmen were collectively known as publimoney. They regarded tax as a thing that cani. And between them? They made it so you did only as a last resort, when the adthe provinces under Roman command were ministration systems in the country they no longer slaughtered and ravaged, which overtook had tax and it was a basis of ruling. was nice of them.

The Romans usually just barged in stripped But they were bled to death instead. the place of any wealth in sight and then swanned out again, cool as you please, safe There was the official tribute the provincials had to pay, the extra the tax the thugs could in the knowledge you can’t call the police because they are the police. And the kings. coerce out of them, the loans of people, all with "ruinous rates”. All this leading to one And the masters. Oh, yeah, you couldn’t thing - enslavement for the poor provincial touch them. Back to Taxxy-Tax. Roman who couldn’t give up all his money The officials that Rome sent to Pergamum to the gold-blooded Romans. The Roman’s so ensure it was ruled right soon discovered made it their business to be as efficient as they could have all the wealth they wanted, possible – Roman roads were improved in and started to become “wallowed in percothe province, just so the taxman could arrive lation” as Holland put it. Taxation became in that much earlier. vogue – it was efficient, and lucrative. There was room for that ever important achieve- Pandora’s Box was truly open. ment.

The West, while not taxed, where irrevocaThis left the rest of the citizens of Rome, the wealthy and the poor, wallowing in indignity. They wanted a bit of the glittering honey from the pot. Gaius Gracchus, like his poor brother Tiberius, wanted the money to form his social reforms. So, in his term as tribune, 21

bly altered as well, as they weren’t exempt from the dash for gold. They were just dug up and mined to hell. Spain was a particular victim, with mines being dug and handed over to the publicani to run. Around 40,000 slaves laboured in miles and miles of

an underground tunnel network. By the end of the 2nd Century BC, all but the Iberian Peninsula of Spain was under Roman industrial control.

to be exact.

Back in Rome, corruption was rife. Although the Senate snootily seemed to hold onto their disgust of the money-grabbing publicani, even going as far as to write in the law the fact that the publicani could not hold a senate position, and a person involved in the senate could not have contact with those in trade. It didn’t work, as you could guess, with corruption and bribes left, right and centre.

Hmm.

The place he was supposed to have looted.

When he arrived, he was met by cheers and flowers.

Something’s not right with this picture.

The Pergameme’s thought so too, and began to think ‘Hmm, how can I stop the mean old Romans coming in and stealing all my money, and food, and livelihood and freedom, including my wife and the cows? He can have the children, they keep screeching.’ Or something to that general effect. Not quite sure, anyway, they were too scared of Typical story, eh? fighting back. They remembered the deBut this corruption eventually led to them struction of Corinth and Carthage in 146BC, drowning in gold. Or well, one man in partic- and thought, nah thanks. ular. And this is where we actually get to the What Asia needed was a leader. And the Roevent the whole article is about. Yeah, I mans, funnily enough, gave them one. made you read through 1,323 words just for In the summer of 89 (cue song) BC, Manius this. Aren’t I awesome?

Aquillius, the commissioner of Asia It starts with a court case. In 92 BC, a prov(Pergamum) was seeking out a new kingdom ince administrator, Rutilius Rufus (cool to plunder and pillage and bleed to death. name) was brought to trial for extortion. You He chose Pontus, near the Black Sea. He, in heard me right. Extortion. Like everyone else his arrogant Roman way, thought, ’I’d rather wasn’t doing it. It was a trumped up charge not kill my troops, so I’ll let a king do all the the jury was full of publicani sympathisers fighting for me. He’ll do it.’ prejudiced against the administrator who But the King of Pontus was a different kettle was refusing to milk every cent out of his of fish – he was a reluctant Roman poodle. poor cash-cows. Rutilius Rufus (can’t get over the name) was a good Roman. He hat- Yes he was! Yes he was! (*coos*). ed the DESECRATION OF GOOD ROMAN Hem, hem.

VALUES. Didn’t help him though. He was Let’s never mention that again. convicted, and sent into exile. He got to choose the place, which was nice of them.

He chose the province of Asia - Pergamum 22

King Mithradates was the name of this reluctant Roman poodle. He was a ruthless, and by a few accounts, quite a rabid poodle, having killed his mother, his brother and his sister to secure his throne when he was boy returning from exile at the head of an army.

He was also obsessed with poisons, having taken every single antidote to every different poison there ever was on the planet till he was immune to them all. Pleasant fellow.

It’s very interesting.

his wars now, don’t you?

“Symbolic justice” says Holland.

I was just detailing the events that led to someone’s gruesome death. Don’t give me that look, I’m allowed to be morbid. It’s fun.

But I haven’t actually told you who died yet have I? Back to 88 BC, then

After the slaughter, the final insult was added to the Roman’s bleeding injury. Mithridates, high on the rides of war, and calculating He shooed the Romans away with a flea in very carefully, his moves and there effect, their ears. took the opportunity presented by a bought Then he did what he had been waiting for all of ill-timed sickness. The general, you know, his reign. What he had been preparing to do. who provoked him? Manius Aquillius? The He waged war on the Roman Republic. He Roman commissioner? He was sick when found a grateful ally in Asia when he took this all happened, and as such was an easy over and booted the Romans out. He wasn’t and symbolic capture for Mithradates. Matheir typical hero, but anything was better nius was dragged back to Pergamum, shackthan the publicani sharks. led and chained to a seven-foot barbarian.

The summer of 88 BC, and the Romans were No Joke. gone and Mithradates ordered all Italians Possible Exaggeration. and Romans left in Asia to be slaughtered.

Further degradation was inflicted by tying There were 80,000 victims.

Manius to an ass (the mule kind, honestly), It was a stark message, with their bodies and parading him through street after street hung on the wall like dirty washing. filled with the vicious Pergamemes, till he It was a victory for Mithradates, and was the was thrown in front of Mithridates. start of the downfall of the Roman Republic, Manius’ head was thrust back. what with Mithradates giving Sulla aspiraHis jaw opened. tions, Sulla doing what he did, and then CaeAnd the gold of Pergamum was forced, drip sar coming along and thinking oooh, good by drip, down his throat. example! And oh, I can’t get into it now. You probably want to know if Mithradates wins He drowned in gold.

Well that’s not what why article’s about, so “Waste of War Funds” says King Mithradates go pick up a book on the Mithridantic Wars – accountant.

23

Then and Now...

History is not just a timeline of dates and series of events but a discipline that invites us to understand humanity, past and present. It gives us the exciting opportunity to take a piece of evidence and after critical analysis, appreciate and comprehend the veracity and relevance of the material.

Most of our historical enthusiasm begins in childhood when we may have imagined how past structures, cultures and belief systems compared to our own minute experience of the present. Later, when we travel to inspirational historical sites, such as our own capital-London, we are confronted by the complexity and diversity of past events and controversies which clash with the modern mind. These controversies are what this article will explore and with this the similarities of then and now historically. Was Mark Twain right in saying: “that no occurrence is sole and solitary, but is merely a repetition of a thing

which has happened before and perhaps often."?

In the 21st century, for instance, the unlawful killing of a single soul is illegal and punishable yet I came to learn about the genocide that occurred during the Roman destruction of Carthage in 146 BCE in which mass murder went unpunished. Another thing I have noticed, which isn’t necessarily a difference but definitely a positive progression from what it once was-is gender inequality. In the nineteenth century, women lived in an age characterized by their sex. At the beginning of the century, women enjoyed few of the legal, social, or political rights that are now taken for granted in western countries: voting, suing, testifying, controlling personal property after marriage, legal custody of children after divorce and access to higher education.

24

Women were expected to remain subservient to their fathers and husbands and their occupational choices were also extremely limited outside of the stereotypical housewife role.

the immoral parts of our past repeating themselves. Perhaps history isn’t just repetition in different forms but in fact a tool that we can use to learn from and evolve as humans.

However there have been many similarities in the course of history that I noted, for example how the private executions of Tower of London prisoners and public executions of the monarchy on Tower Hill relate to the death penalty nowadays, exercised in 32 states (from Delaware to Wyoming) in the USA. Again-in the summer of 82 AD, three Roman warships were hijacked which links to the current terrorist attacks and threats the world faces. Most recently the January 2015 terror attacks in Paris whereby 16 people and a police officer were killed in attacks on the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo and a kosher grocery store. One may begin to wonder if from Rome’s earliest foundations on the Palatine Hill to the triumph of the new religion of Christianity and the subsequent collapse of an empire almost 1200 years later, has much truly changed? Have we humans mastered the earth yet in order to deal with natural and moral evil? Historian Will Durant expressed: “So the story of man runs in a dreary circle,” is Durant correct in stating that our actions are cyclical and simply a historic recurrence?

H.H.Wilson from the University of Nebraska stated that there is a “…relation of history to the study and practice of law”. Some would suggest that it doesn’t really matter if history is just a chain of recurrent events or not because even if it’s nothing bar a subject, the study of this subject provides transferable skills for other professions.

One thing I personally realise is that there are clear differences from then and now in virtually everything. Such as how the historical meanings of words have evolved over time into new meanings. Nowadays I understand what words mean through various contexts, such as who is saying the word, where, when, why and how they are saying it rather than just a single definition from a dictionary. For example, the word “gay” previously meant happiness-a lively mood however now it is associated with homosexuality. I was captivated on learning that even the very words I speak have an in-depth history- that I tend to overlook since my idiolect is spoken every day without thought.

Surely examples like the above prove that Or as Adolf von Harnack said: 'We study his- changes have occurred in the course of history? tory in order to intervene in the course of Yet humans do tend to behave in the same history”. This quote by such a prominent church historian implies that the survival of ways no matter what century they inhabited. Predominantly in the 1900s, people liked evidence, which may be a matter of good luck, is enabling us today to try and prevent to think that by attending memorials of 25

certain soldiers and regiments of the First Now” or if history truly is echoing itself but World War, for example, that they were pre- just in different contexts? serving the memory of the people involved

By Caitlin Touhey. in the fighting, those people who were forever to be scarred by their involvement, and the places ravaged by the war. In times of similar horrific circumstances nowadays, humans have acted identically. Proof of this is how the Tribute in Light memorial was constructed in 2004 following the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Does this suggest that historical events don’t repeat themselves but just that human emotion always will?

To conclude I believe that there are more similarities than differences then and now with reference to our history. World War One left a poisonous legacy for the 20th century and the issues that were left unresolved in 1918, lead to another world war in 1939. The trigger of the war wasn’t addressed causing a second, likewise the Cabinet decided in March 2003 that Britain would join in the war against Iraq and still troops from the United Kingdom are fighting-with little positive change being made. On reading “Empress Dowager Cixi: The Concubine Who Launched Modern China” by Jung Chang, I gained a deeper understanding into the monumental obstacles not only a female leader faced but an ancient country. I realised that feminism isn’t a modern idea backed by Emma Watson and the “10/10/10” campaign but has been at the heart of society, I believe, since the religious image of Adam and Eve. The question, for us all, is whether we are just searching and inventing the similarities of “Then and 26

The Woodvilles

Many people may have heard of Elizabeth Woodville, the beautiful, impoverished widower who seduced and charmed Edward IV. His union with her at the time was considered highly controversial by the English court and people. The most eligible bachelor in Europe, had thrown away all prospects of a good match for a 'common' pauper, whose family were considered to be upstarts. The reputation the new Queens family gained whilst they took over the English court, has left them as one of England's most notorious and hated families. However, I find their actions and strength admirable, most notably that of Jacquetta Woodville who was Elizabeth's illustrious mother.

lish and European royalty, it was said that Jacquetta could trace her line back to the mythical water goddess, Melusina. In alchemy, she is a character who represents the water and moon; thus making her a powerful woman in her own right. In 1969, when Jacquetta herself was accused of practising witchcraft to bring out her daughters and Edward's marriage, her apparent descent from Melusina was used against her.

During the fifteenth century, a woman reached marriageable age at fourteen years. A woman of Jacquetta's status and wealth wouldn't have been allowed to choose her own husband and it was unheard of amongst the rich to marry for love.

Jacquetta of Luxembourg was born in the Love was a subject saved for poems and legyear 1416. At her time of birth women were ends, not a reason to marry. The purpose of of little importance. However the daughter marriage was to conform alliances, earn of the heir of Luxembourg ,became a lead- dowries and ultimately to create a male heir ing English woman, through the turbulent to inherit the vast amounts of wealth. reigns of two kings, the mother of a Queen and the founder of a great dynasty.

Unusually, Jacquetta was married at the later age of seventeen; after having a marriage As well as having ancestors from both Eng- arranged on her behalf, by her uncle: 27

Chancellor Louis of Luxembourg. John Duke of Bedford, had been brothers with the great Henry V of England (who had famously defeated the French at the battle of Agincourt, before his untimely death in 1422) and was acting as regent for his young, vulnerable nephew- Henry IV.

However, being young, beautiful and in love, the headstrong Jacquetta had other plans in mind.

Before her husband died, he had appointed the knight, Sir Richard Woodville to fortify the garrison at Calais. He was a thirty year old soldier, who had fought loyally in the English army to defeat the French for some Jacquetta's match with John was a great time. As Jacquetta's older husbands fragile one, through marriage with him she became health failed, she grew even closer to the the first lady in France, second only to the handsome Sir Richard. It seemed that at Kings mother (Catherine of Valois) in Engevery the turn, the lovers were thrown closland. For a seventeen year old girl, being er together, because upon John's death, married to a man twenty-six years her sen- Richard was ordered to accompany ior must have been quite an overwhelming Jacquetta on her journey to England. and frightening prospect. However, lots of Sometime, in the later months of young noblewomen were married to men 1436 the two lovers were married: one a much older than themselves and they were lowly knight and the other a wealthy widow. prepared for this from birth.

Although, both were happy and in love at last. However, Jacquetta knew her marriage Unfortunately, this was not to last for long; went against the terms of her dower. Not just two short years later, in 1435, John only that, but she was a high born lady, an Duke of Bedford passed away. Their marheir of Luxembourg and a duchess of Engriage left no issue, but we can infer it was a land. To many, it seemed she had abansomewhat happy one, as Jacquetta was doned her duties to her country and named as John's sole heir, in his more than shamed herself by marrying a mere knight. charitable will. Upon his death she received: all but one of John's lands (for life) and his In the early months of 1437, the couple much adored library, which was famous for confessed to the royal council they had marcontaining many volumes. ried without consent. As a punishment Even though Jacquetta's husband was dead, she was still a royal duchess of England and Henry VI expected her presence at the English court. In the February of 1436 Jacquetta was granted her dower (a pension for widowers) with the condition she could not remarry without the kings' consent. She of course knew that once her year of mourning was over, another powerful marriage would be arranged for her by the king and his council.

Jacquetta was severely fined. She was made to pay a thousand pounds, which was an enormous sum of money in the fifteenth century. Later on she was forgiven by the king and by October 1437 the couple had received an official pardon for their crime.

The pardon came just in time before the birth of Elizabeth, the couples first child who would one day become Queen of England.

Jacquetta and Richard moved into their country house of Grafton Manor, which

28

they had bought from the rich William de la Pole in 1440. Elizabeth was the first of fourteen children, although only thirteen of them made it to adulthood. At the time many of your children wouldn't survive to be adults. So the death of their son Lewis in 1443 wouldn't have been too unexpected, still a great tragedy nonetheless.

As the years went by Jacquetta and Richard gained quite a reputation as staunch Lancastrian supporters. Richard was deputy commander of Calais for quite a while.

Meanwhile Jacquetta became chief lady in waiting and great friend to her kinswoman Margaret of Anjou, who was the English queen. In May 1448 Richard was even promoted to the title of Baron Rivers, making Jacquetta Lady Rivers. The couple stayed loyal to Lancaster until the house was defeated by the Yorkists in 1461 and Edward IV came to the throne.

The reason I adore Jacquetta, is because in a world ruled by men she displayed female strength by defying the conventions of society. Unlike the other medieval woman around her, Jacquetta was ambitious, courageous and reckless. She fell in love with a man beneath her in term of social standing and instead of being timid, she was bold and opposed the English King. The marriage could have been her ruin. Unlike other women Jacquetta was prepared to fight for her love and the wealth that was rightfully hers. To some this action may seem audacious yet I believe it is a clear example of female power.

Jacquetta is in a way a very early feminist; making her in my eyes a little magical, just like her watery ancestor Melusina.

By Megan Walsh.

29

The Cold War

The Cold War was a state of political and military tension after the end of World War II. The Cold War was a rivalry between the USA and the USSR, with one side following capitalism (USA) and one side following communism (USSR). When World War II ended, the Soviets began creating a ‘sphere of influence’ in Europe, comprised of the countries where the Red Army pushed back the Nazis. This is the primary reason why many believe that the Cold War began in 1945; however some believe that it began during World War II, as Joseph Stalin’s mistrust of the USA and Britain increased as they refused to invade Europe, which would greatly help the war effort by opening up the Western Front.

tually lead to the construction of the Berlin Wall in 1961. The way the USA responded to the Soviets was with a policy known as ‘containment’. Containment, devised by George F Kennan, was created as a middle ground between the two extremes of armed conflict and appeasement. The idea was to stand up to the Soviets wherever they wanted to expand. The USA did this by spending a lot of money on rebuilding Europe ($13 billion) with grants and credits that the Europeans would spend on American goods and construction. It was hoped that this would stop the spread of communism.

Another important part of the Cold War was the nuclear arms race. In the arms race, both the US and the USSR began building The Cold War began in Europe, more specifi- nuclear weapons (the Soviets stole American secrets). Eventually, both nations had cally, in Germany, which was divided into amassed nuclear arsenals that were so two parts (East and West) with Berlin also divided into East and West. This split even- large, that both sides agreed on a strategy 30

known as M.A.D, which stands for ‘mutually assured destruction,’ which was essentially a much more dangerous version of the alliance system in World War I, with both sides acting as each other’s deterrent.

1973, or the coup in Iran to overthrow Prime Minister Mohammed Mosaddegh after his attempts to nationalise Iran’s oil industry. On the Soviet side, they forcefully crushed uprisings in Hungary and CzechoHowever, even though mutually assured de- slovakia. struction prevented direct conflict between Another example of a smaller conflict during the Cold War was the Suez Crisis, where the USA and USSR, the Cold War led to many violent conflicts across the globe. For Egypt aimed to nationalise the Suez Canal. example, the Korean War, which led to the It is one of the most important and controversial events in British history since the split of Korea into South Korea and the Second World War. Not only did Suez result Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea), and the Vietnam War, which in deep political and public division in Britain, it also caused international uproar. ended up being one of the USA’s longest wars. These wars contributed to the ‘domino theory’ which was a theory that said that if a nation came under communist influence; the nations that surround it would fall too. This meant that the U.S feared for Japan, which, after the destruction that the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki caused, they had rebuilt into a capitalist ally. The Soviets had an influence in the Vietnam War as they assisted the North Vietnamese army. The USA countered this by supporting the anti-communist Mujahidin in Afghanistan, due to the Soviets invading them in 1979. This eventually led to the Soviets abandoning Afghanistan after 10 years of fighting.

So, by now, the majority of the planet was divided into three ‘worlds’. The first world believed in capitalism and included countries such as the USA, Great Britain and West Germany. The second world embraced communism and included countries such as the USSR, China and the DPRK (North Korea). Finally, the third world was comprised of all the other countries that weren’t strictly capitalist or communist. Both the first world and the second world wanted everyone in the third world to pick a side, and this was often a tricky decision to make, as the US did things such as prop up dictatorships, while the Soviets mostly won the space race, as they sent the first manned satellite, (Sputnik I) the first living thing, (Laika the dog) and the first human, (Yuri Gagarin) into space.

There were also many smaller conflicts, such all of the US covert operations performed to stop countries falling to communism. For example, when the CIA helped By this part of the Cold War, communism was becoming less and less appealing comGeneral Augusto Pinochet of Chile overthrow Marxist president Salvador Allende in pared to capitalism, as it could not keep up with economic advancements in the West.

31

Another key factor that led to the downfall of communism and, eventually the end of the Cold War were the plans of Mikhail Gorbachev.

et system. The way he did this was with Glasnost and Perestroika. Glasnost, meaning openness, was widely celebrated and led to increased openness and transparency in included countries such as the USSR, China government institutions and activities in the Soviet Union. Glasnost also led to less cenand the DPRK (North Korea). Finally, the sorship and more freedom of information in third world was comprised of all the other the USSR. This led to the people realising countries that weren’t strictly capitalist or communist. Both the first world and the sec- how much poorer they were in comparison to the Western world. Perestroika, meaning ond world wanted everyone in the third restructuring, aimed to revive the Soviet world to pick a side, and this was often a tricky decision to make, as the US did things economy by making it more market based, such as prop up dictatorships, while the So- similar to successful capitalist practices in Germany, Japan, and the USA. However, Peviets mostly won the space race, as they restroika wasn’t as well accepted as Glassent the first manned satellite, (Sputnik I) the first living thing, (Laika the dog) and the nost, due to how economies take time to thrive. This lead to long-lines, strikes and civfirst human, (Yuri Gagarin) into space. il unrest.

By this part of the Cold War, communism was becoming less and less appealing com- After this reformation of the Soviet Union, pared to capitalism, as it could not keep up different Soviet states began to collapse. The with economic advancements in the West. Berlin Wall fell in 1989 and East and West Another key factor that led to the downfall Germany re-united in 1990. There were elections in Hungary and Czechoslovakia and of communism and, eventually the end of the Cold War were the plans of Mikhail Gor- in 1993, Czechoslovakia split into Slovakia and the Czech Republic. bachev.

Mikhail Gorbachev was the General Secre- In conclusion, the Cold War included many high and low points for the two superpowtary of the Soviet Union from March 11th ers and the world as a whole. It also lead to 1985 to August 24th 1991. By the 1980s the many countries becoming communist, and Soviet economy was in drastic need of rewhile most abandoned communism, some form. In 1985, after three elderly leaders still exist, such as China, Cuba, Laos, North died in quick succession, Gorbachev, a proKorea and Vietnam. tégé of former Soviet leader Yuri Andropov, was appointed General Secretary and head By Bailey Blackburn. of the Soviet Union. At 54 he was one of the youngest leaders and was seen as the new broom that could clean up the decrepit Sovi32

Mahatma Gandhi: The Power of Peace

30th January 1948 saw the death of a hero.

Mahatma Gandhi, the humble Hindu man who showed the world the power of peace, and offered an escape from violence, was assassinated on his way to a prayer meeting.

To this day, the legacy of Gandhi and his brave, non-violent approach to changing the world lives on.

Born in Gujarat in India, Gandhi (his name then Mohandas) grew up as an average child. Although by no means rich, Gandhi’s family had sufficient money, and despite being sent to primitive schools to begin with, in 1887 he was sent to the University of Bombay before being moved to London to train as a barrister. Following several years in a hugely different climate and culture, Gandhi returned to India in 1891. During his time in London, he had religiously kept to a promise he had made to his mother before leaving. He did not eat meat, smoke or drink 33

alcohol (these were things forbidden by the branch of Hinduism -Vaishnavism- that his family followed). Upon returning to India, he was devastated to hear that his mother had passed away whilst he was abroad. He also discovered that his law qualification was not as valuable as he had expected- the profession was now becoming overcrowded and it was difficult to find a job.

Eventually, he was offered a placement with an Indian law-firm in Natal, South Africa. It was on his way to Natal that he had his first real experience of the segregation and racism in South Africa. He was thrown out of a first-class railway carriage, assaulted by a white coach driver when he refused to move for a European passenger, and was later sent away from hotels reserved for Europeans only. All Indians living in Natal were treated in this way and Gandhi was disgusted to witness their suffering. Although he strongly disagreed with the treatment of the Natal Indians, it was not until just before his

scheduled return to India that he realised something had to change. He happened to read a newspaper article saying that Natal Indians would soon be denied the right to vote. He was so infuriated that he decided to stay in South Africa and fight for the rights of the Indians himself. He founded the Natal Indian Congress, and began to work passionately to protect his people. He rallied support and increased awareness all over the world, but it took a long time and in 1899, the Boer War interrupted progress. Gandhi himself joined the South African forces and encouraged others to do so. Despite his opposition to the South African’s opinion of the Indians, he believed that because the Indians claimed to be citizens of Natal it was their duty to defend it.

independent country, and, using his new strategy of peaceful non-cooperation, he soon became a very influential leader of the “rebellion” against British rule.

To begin with, Gandhi engaged in low-level action. He encouraged Indian peasants not to pay their taxes and spoke with the viceroy. He said that he was ashamed to have to speak English in India. And yet at this point Gandhi still believed that the British Empire was not all bad, it just needed some improvements.

It was not until the Amritsar massacre that Gandhi lost all of his respect for the British Empire. During the war, the Indians had been told that they were to have some of their rights temporarily removed. For example, they were no longer allowed to hold The Boer War was followed by several years protest meetings. However, at the end of the war, the rights were not returned to them. of difficult work for the Natal Indian ConGandhi believed this was unfair, and encourgress. However, by July 1914 Gandhi had aged the Indians to hold peaceful protest achieved most of what he wanted. He had meetings. However, in Amritsar, some prodeveloped a peaceful strategy which he tests turned violent and a British policeman called: “Satyagraha” or devotion to truth. was pulled off his bike. At the time, the Indians were “reprimanded” by being forced to This involved non-violently protesting against evil and injustice. It proved success- crawl on their tummies, but a more brutal ful, and by the time Gandhi left South Africa, and unforeseen punishment came later on. the rights of Natal Indians had improved.

Following the violent protests, public Gandhi had learned lots from his experienc- meetings in Amritsar were banned. In an act of defiance, thousands of unarmed Indians es in South Africa. He had been disgusted by met at Jallianwala Bagh in Amritsar on the his first experiences of racism and segrega13th April 1919. Their intention was to hold a tion. He had also discovered that nonpeaceful meeting to protest against the cruviolence could be a very successful tactic. elty and injustice of the British rule. UnfortuTherefore, upon returning to India in 1915, nately, General Reginald Dyer decided to use the group of Indians (which consisted of he decided to continue to fight for justice men, women and children) as an example to and freedom for his people. His attentions were attracted by the plight to make India an show what would happen to any rebellious 34

Indians. Without warning, Dyer and his soldiers entered Jallianwala Bagh, heavily armed with rifles and a tank, and opened fire. They killed 379 innocent Indians and injured around 1200 more. No Indian made any attempt to retaliate or attack Dyer and his men. They remained true to Gandhi and his peaceful policy of Satyagraha.

er, it was not guaranteed that they would remain loyal- especially with the current tension between the Indians and their British rulers. Gandhi advised his people to join the armed forces and defend the Empire, but said that in return they must be given independence come the end of the war. Although the British never officially All Indians, Muslim and Hindu alike were agreed to such a bargain, considering the now united against the British Empire. They number of Indians that gave their lives to were a formidable force, led by Gandhi, the defend the rulers who treated them so badwise yet humble man who maintained that ly, it is no surprise that they declared the no matter what the British did, if they kept British “satanic” when they discovered that to their non-violent ethics then eventually they would not be given their reward. they would be rewarded with independence. Gandhi was now planning his newest It was now clear that the Indians had the moral high ground. A combination of their movement- the Salt March. Despite being almost untainted record of non-violence something widely available on the shores of and peaceful non-cooperation, the loyalty India, salt was a taxed commodity, and it and bravery that they had showed during was illegal to make it. In a further act of de- the war and the skill and persuasiveness of fiance, on the 12th March 1930, Gandhi led their leader, Gandhi led to their eventual 100,000 Indians to Dandi beach, where he independence in 1947. It had been a long, made salt. He claimed that it was the right difficult and for some fatal road to justice, of his people to harvest the resources avail- and the victory should have been a monumental success. However, Gandhi was sad able to them in their homeland and to see that despite his efforts to keep unity aroused strong feelings of patriotism and between Muslims and Hindus, independpride in the Indians. They were now more ence would bring with it the partition of Inmotivated than ever to continue to fight dia into two separate countries, India and alongside Gandhi, and despite the fact that Pakistan, one for the Muslims and one for most of the Indians with Gandhi were the Hindus. Although he is still regarded as thrown into prison, their eagerness to be a the “Father of India”, and was undoubtedly an incredibly strong and wise leader, in part of the movement that they hoped would make India an independent country many ways, Gandhi believed that he had failed. did not die.

In the months following independence, In 1939, the world faced another war. As Gandhi preached about the importance of part of the British Empire, the Indians were acceptance and tolerance towards people expected to fight alongside Britain. Howevof all religions. He also still believed strongly 35

in the in exhaustible strength of peace and remained the humble little Indian man in his homespun loincloth, the man the world had learned to respect and love.

As a Hindu man who had always showed leniency towards Muslims, Gandhi was subjected to the disapproval of extremists. On 30th January 1948, he was assassinated by Nathuram Godse, a radical Hindu. Gandhi was shot by one of the very people whose freedom he had worked for years to save. A life of humility, passion, benevolence, determination, courage and understanding was ended because one man was too closeminded to see what Gandhi had seen, to see that war, violence and cruelty would not lead to a better world.

Throughout his lifetime, Gandhi had devoted himself to improving the lives of others.

His work will never be forgotten, even today we see some of the effects of the changes that he instigated, and we can only hope that one day, the world will see another man like Mahatma Gandhi, another man who will truly understand the capacity and potential of truth and love. “When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they can seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall. Think of it-always.� Mahatma Gandhi.

By Dana McGibbon.

36

An Interview with Richard Blake

In an interview exclusive to the Winstanley College History Magazine, Dr Sean Gabb, who goes by the pen-name “Richard Blake” tells us, among other things, what makes history a good subject.

nomic and Political Advisor to the Slovak Prime Minister, Ján Čarnogurský. Since 2006, he has been the director of the civil liberties think-tank, the Libertarian Alliance.

How did you end up writing historical novHe is the author of 20 books, six of them his- els? Was it always the plan? torical novels for Hodder & Stoughton.

Very little in my life has been planned.

These have been translated into Spanish, There are some people who map out Italian, Greek, Slovak, Hungarian, Chinese their futures while at school and stick to and Indonesian. Under his own name, he the map. Good luck to them, if they find has written four novels. His other books are they have chosen the right map. In my mainly about libertarian politics. case, I started with certain ambitions, In addition to writing, he has lectured and and left it largely to chance which I taught at various universities including Midwould achieve. I suppose I am lucky to dlesex University, the University of Buckinghave got as far as I have. ham, Greenwich University, Charles UniverThis being said, becoming a novelist was sity (Prague), and Comenius University always one of my ambitions. As a school(Slovakia), and in the 1990s he was the Ecoboy, I wrote dozens of short stories.

37

I also wrote a verse play based on the trial of Jeremy Thorpe. After university, I wrote a novel that no one would even consider publishing. Later in my twenties, I wrote another novel that got the same response. After this, I largely gave up on fiction, and I turned to non-fiction. This did get published, though hardly ever in the mainstream media.

Then, in 2005, two things happened. The first was that my wife took me on a long weekend to Rome. Despite a lifetime obsession with the ancient world and its literature, I had never been there. We wandered about all the ancient sites. But, even for me – especially in the February cold – there was a limit to how many piles of broken masonry I felt inclined to look at. After a visit to the church of St Mary Maggiore – built in the fourth century and still in use – we decided to spend the rest of our time looking at the early Christian and mediaeval buildings.

They gave a much stronger feel for the past than any of the ancient sites, the Pantheon excepted.

The second was my mother’s loan to me of about a dozen of her favourite Roman detective novels. This is a developed sub-genre – set a standard detective mystery in the Ancient World. I read a couple of these and threw the rest aside in disgust. They were badly-written as novels, and were filled with more historical blunders than I felt willing to tolerate.

“Can you do any better?” my mother asked.

So, in April 2005, I decided to write a Roman detective novel of my own. Because of my trip to Rome – and because of my considerable interest in and knowledge of the end of Antiquity – I would set it around the end of the sixth century. This was a time when direct Roman rule had ended in most of the Western provinces, and Rome itself was falling into ruin, but when the Eastern half of the Empire continued in full swing, under an Emperor ruling from Constantinople.

Another reason I chose this period was because I thought too many other people had set their historical fiction in the two centuries about the Birth of Christ. I might as well try for originality.

A further decision was to make the hero a young Englishman. I didn’t know how good I could make the novel, and I felt it would add something to its immediacy to have a fellow countryman as the hero. So I called up a list of Anglo-Saxon names. I wanted something that was distinctly English but not obviously modern. I came across the name Aelric. I wanted him young and clever and beautiful, and dithered a bit over his age before settling on eighteen. And that was it.

Something I didn’t bother thinking about was a plot. I had a vague idea about a murder in Rome, which young Aelric would investigate in the usual way.

Three pages into the novel, though, this resolve collapsed. Instead, I found myself writing with as much conscious direction

“Just you watch me,” I answered.

38

as some surrealist poet in the 1920s.

tiquity. The Damascus novel is set near the end of the seventh century, after the Arab I wrote on railway journeys to London. I conquests, when my hero is in his late ninewrote in the gaps between the lectures I ties. It’s a thriller about Greek Fire – the was giving at my university. I wrote on an mysterious chemical weapon that the Byzaeroplane journey to and from America, antine Empire used to turn back the tide of and in the American hotel when I wasn’t about my paid business. I wrote and wrote, Islamic conquest, and to face down Islam for the next four hundred years. I think it’s watching a surprisingly tight plot organise itself on the computer screen. I finished The my best novel – and I’ve now written Column of Phocas in six weeks, and missed twelve. It’s certainly my favourite. it horribly the first day I thought there was Rather than continue answering your question, though, let me go back to the matter nothing more to do with it. of plotting. Some writers like to make up a What happened next I will describe only long prior synopsis – showing what happens briefly. No agent or publisher would touch and when, and describing all the characters. the book. In the end, I formatted it in What I do is to start with a vague idea of MSWord, and gave it a cover, and engaged a where I want to end, and leave the rest of printer to make a thousand copies. These inspiration. As I write, the ideas pop into my sold out within a few months. I then wrote mind. Frequently, I have to go back and redirectly to a dozen publishers, suggesting vise or add chapters. The final product they should have another look at me. The hangs together, and always looks as if it was result was two offers. I’ve now written six designed from the outset. But the process is books in my Byzantine Series, all by “Richard chaotic.

Blake.” These are: Why Byzantium?

Conspiracies of Rome (2008) The Terror of Constantinople (2009) I discovered the Ancient World when I was eight. I was so smitten by it that I tried to The Blood of Alexandria (2010) teach myself Greek. That had to wait till my The Sword of Damascus (2011) twenties, but I did teach myself Latin, and I The Ghosts of Athens (2012) disappeared into a compulsive reading of The Curse of Babylon (2013) everything I could find on the Greeks and Where are your historical novels set priRomans and their neighbours. Then, when I marily? was twelve, I read Gibbon. He begins in the To some extent, I’ve answered that quessecond century, but only becomes an unaption. Look at the titles, and that will tell you proachable classic when he gets to the where the others are set. What I wanted in fourth century. I went with him through all the six was to show the main cities as they the crises of Late Antiquity and the early Middle Ages. That laid the basis for what I probably looked and felt at the end of An39

did at university. The York History Department had no particular interest in the Classical Ages of Greece and Rome. But several of the people there were distinguished mediaevalists, and they let me focus on the fifth and sixth centuries. They eventually pulled me far enough forward to become a competent Byzantine scholar.

entity, was more likely to be mad or a tyrant than a Marcus Aurelius.

Even a less awful government than this system provided couldn’t have stopped the great misfortunes of the fifth century.

Starting around the second century, global temperatures began to cool. This led to a wave of epidemic diseases and a movement Add this to my desire to be original, and you of peoples that brought the Empire to the have one answer to your question. I know edge of collapse. But heavy taxation and buthe period. I’ve read all the sources, and reaucratic meddling made these primary hundreds of journal articles. misfortunes even worse.

Another reason, however, is that Byzantine history is much more inspiring than most Western scholars were willing to realise until the last half of the twentieth century. The standard view, before then, was of a fossilised semi-theocracy that only survived a thousand years because its enemies were even more useless than it was. The truth is radically different.

Then, after the collapse or the Western Empire, the Eastern half turned Greek Christian.

It carried on in something like the old style until the end of the sixth century, when it got into a war with the Persian Empire that it nearly lost, and then had to deal with the first explosion of Islam into the world. The Persian Empire, ultimately defeated in its war with the Empire, collapsed in a single Classical Greece and Rome are undoubtedly campaign. But, though the Empire lost Egypt glamorous. The Greeks gave us the founda- and Syria and North Africa, it stayed alive and kicking in every province that was Greek tions of our science and philosophy. They were a special people. The Romans gave us and Orthodox. our distinct notions of law and administraWhat happened was that the Byzantine Govtion. They are the parents of our own civili- ernment dropped virtually the whole of its sation. Apart from that, they were dreadful Roman heritage. A vast programme of land people. The Greeks were a collection of eth- redistribution turned the agricultural classes into armed freeholders. Taxes and regulanocentric tribes, who nearly exterminated each other before they were conquered by tions were systematically cut or abolished.

The urban proletariats were told to feed outsiders. The Roman Empire was an inthemselves or to starve. The result, behind a creasingly total slave state, with a class of façade of divine right monarchy, was an parasitic landlords and an equally parasitic armed democracy that faced down every bureaucracy piled on top. Right at the top threat to its existence until nearly the end of was an Emperor who, where not a nonthe eleventh century, and that managed 40

more or less to keep going into the middle of the fifteenth century.

Properly read, Byzantine history is an inspiring history – at least as inspiring as the history of the Classical Greek resistance to Darius and Xerxes. It’s a wonderful setting for historical fiction.

Who are the main influences on your writing style?

Too many names to list. But here is a partial list: Mary Renault, Mika Waltari, Gore Vidal, Paul Capon, George MacDonald Fraser, Patrick O’Brian, et al, et al.

What makes a good historical novel?

I’ll begin with what makes a good novel. The answer here is a strong plot and credible characters. I’ve never had any time for the Modern Movement in literature or in anything else. Any novel that doesn’t give its readers a good story is a bad novel. A dreary novel is also a bad novel. In my view, Catherine Cookson is a better novelist than Virginia Woolf. Jeffrey Archer is better than James Joyce. Iris Murdoch was a fraud. So too just about anything you’ll find on an A Level English list of set books.

I turn to historical fiction. You still need a strong plot and credible characters. You also need to get your facts right. When did the Greeks and Romans have dinner? Did they wear underclothes? How did they wipe their bottoms? Get these facts, and any of the others, wrong, and you deserve a good beating from your readers and the critics.

41

You also need to get the balance right between fact and fantasy. Unless you’re into writing semi-fictional pageants in the style of Jean Plaidy, you’ll have a mix of real and fictional characters. The mix has to work. In my Churchill Memorandum (2011), written under another name, I bring in much of the mid-twentieth century British political establishment. But this is an alternative history satire, set in a world where the Second World War hadn’t happened. I can do as I please with my characters. In my alternative 1959, I could turn everyone who actually existed into a grossly defamatory caricature.

In my Byzantine novels, there are only half a dozen characters who really existed. The main ones are the Emperors Phocas and Heraclius, the General Priscus, and the King of Persia. Except they were rather unpleasant, we know very little about any of them.

There was no Herodotus or Suetonius or Tacitus to tell us how they behaved or what they said. This means I can treat them as I please. Phocas is a kind of Stalin. Heraclius may be a clever politician or a dithering fool.

Chosroes is a raving maniac. If Priscus were brought back to life, he might be flattered by what I’ve done with him. But the main answer to this question is that your problem doesn’t arrive. The real characters might as well be fictional for all I need to pay attention to my sources.

Then there is the matter of language. This is a problem in all historical fiction. Let me begin by showing how it shouldn’t be done.

Take this:

The King rose up upon his couch. “Thou shalt, before this night is out,” he quoth, “mount upon thy trusty charger and bring me the head of the false Bobindrell.”

in my novels, these are fully evidenced in the sources. Life is usually awful when it isn’t boring. The answer has always been to find the right mix of chemicals to make things Whether people may once have spoken like seem better than they are. this in England is beside the point. What What would you say to anyone studying hismatters is that it sounds ridiculous now, and tory at A-level today? it distances a reader from the characters in a Good luck. History has always contained a novel. Whether your novel is set in England fair bit of propaganda for the fashionable orc1550, or some other time and place, here is der of things. My advice – and this also aphow I suggest it should be done: plies to A Level Economics – is to put your Still smiling, the King leaned closer. “I want the f--- dead,” he breathed. “I don’t care how you do it. Just make sure none of the blame ever drifts my way.” He drank from his cup again and went back to watching the jugglers.

head down and to the work. We live in a country where you are nothing without a stack of paper to prove you are worth taking seriously. Be aware of the falsehoods you are required to learn, and parrot them to order whenever required.

Of course, you avoid words and images that only make sense in our own civilisation. But, when I write one of my Byzantine novels, I try to write in a way that sounds natural to a modern English reader. I can do this because the pretence is that the narrator is writing in natural Greek which has been translated into natural English. At the same time, an educated person writing Greek in the seventh century would have paid some regard to the conventions of the ancient language. Therefore, the English translation has a slight tinge of the eighteenth century. You get something like this:

If you were 16 today, would you go on to read history at university?

“My Lord Bishop,” I sighed, “you really should consider how much you are p-ssing off our Imperial Lord and Master.”

As for things like sexual morality and the taste for recreational substances you’ll find

Probably not. When I was there, York was run by the social democratic left. Those people more than tolerated me. They sometimes rolled their eyes at me. They nagged me when I ignored their reading lists. But they would never have dreamed of marking me down for anything I wrote. I was a rabid libertarian and High Tory. They found that amusing, and nothing more than that. They also let me study whatever I fancied. I don’t think I’d have so easy a run today.

If I were going to university in 2015, I’d apply to do Classics. There is a mass of left-wing idiocy there as well. But the discipline needed for understanding the Classical Languages, and the ingrained habits of several

42

thousand years of classical scholarship, make it harder to do to Classics what has been done to English Literature or even History.

What makes history a good subject, or what is good about history?

Any history is good that puts you in touch with the sources. That includes even the older kinds of Marxist history. At all times, we live in a bath of propaganda for whatever is fashionable. Sometimes what is fashionable may be true. But one advantage of studying the past by going to the sources is that you are made to realise that your own assumptions and prejudices have not been universally accepted. I believe that a close study of English History between about 1660 and 1914 will put you in touch with the truth on most issues. Even if you study the Witchcraft Mania of the sixteenth century, though, or the Wars of Religion, or the Crusades, you will be forced to think about what you believe.

But this is pompous, if probably true. History is a vast treasure house of good stories. Historians like Herodotus and Tacitus and Gibbon are among the best prose writers. Anyone who refuses to study History is giving up on a lifetime of first rate entertainment.

By Keir Martland.

43

s ’ at

h

W

n e be n i n

e p p

a h

. . . g Remembering the Holocaust: Poetry readings and discussions.

Verney Civil Rights Lecture Debate:

'We've Never Had it So Good: Britain is a

much better place than it was in 1914'

Dungeons and Dragons & Total War groups

Heresy convention at Nottingham University 44

Winstanley College History Society 2014-2015‌ PRESIDENTS

Cameron Fleming & Zara Andrews

VICE PRESIDENT

Keir Martland

SOCIAL MEDIA

Harry Griffiths & Mollie Williams

HISTORICAL DRAMA

Vanessa Holt & Ruth Cambell

TOTAL WAR TOURNAMENTS

Dominic Doran

HISTORY MAGAZINE CO-EDITORS Madeleine McDonagh & Sally Dickens MAGAZINE EDITORIAL TEAM

Emma Porter, Keir Martland, Nathaniel Lamb & Elizabeth Cunliffe

45