aaid Posted January 24, 2017 Share Posted January 24, 2017 2 minutes ago, Mark frae Crieff said: Neil Oliver defined:- A myopic Historian who cannae see the future. ps I didnae like his bakers either.. He's an archaeologist not a historian. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark frae Crieff Posted January 24, 2017 Share Posted January 24, 2017 Just now, aaid said: He's an archaeologist not a historian. Better defines ma point wi his head literally buried in the earth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parklife Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 12 hours ago, Mark frae Crieff said: Better defines ma point wi his head literally buried in the earth. Is it, aye? His head is "literally" buried in the earth? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orraloon Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 1 minute ago, Parklife said: Is it, aye? His head is "literally" buried in the earth? If only. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil r Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 Mark playing a blinder here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark frae Crieff Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 2 hours ago, neil r said: Mark playing a blinder here. It got my point across .... If you have to post on it you have thought about it.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil r Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 5 minutes ago, Mark frae Crieff said: It got my point across .... It really didn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ormond Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 4 hours ago, neil r said: It really didn't. It literally did. I felt a big point smack me on the napper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toepoke Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 I know I said this settlement pre-dated Scotland, but according to the Herald in didn't pre-date the UK... http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15049513.BBC_historians_under_fire_for_claim_Orkney_was_UK_capital/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaid Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 (edited) 14 minutes ago, Toepoke said: I know I said this settlement pre-dated Scotland, but according to the Herald in didn't pre-date the UK... http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15049513.BBC_historians_under_fire_for_claim_Orkney_was_UK_capital/ I understand that Neil Oliver has found fragments of prehistoric Charles and Diana souvenir pottery that he's carbon dated himself and which shows that the UK predates Scotland by at least 5000 years. Edited January 26, 2017 by aaid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thistle do nicely Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 I liked how they just made up fairytales about what was happening in orkney and Chris Packham basically pointed out that it was difficult to know what people were thinking based on archaeological evidence you could find. That was the end of that conversation. Flouncy ##### trying to steal other peoples hard work as if he had dug it all up himself himself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 Hostory revisionism due to nationalist politics always ends well. I wonder if there is a programme on Scottish history on slavery. That will go down a storm. All that tobacco wealth in Glasgow was not build via worker co-operatives. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stocky Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 1 minute ago, Alan said: Hostory revisionism due to nationalist politics always ends well. I wonder if there is a programme on Scottish history on slavery. That will go down a storm. All that tobacco wealth in Glasgow was not build via worker co-operatives. All done under the Union Flag.. Glasgow was made rich, as was the British Empire under the Union Jack.. Slavery, pillage, Theft and genocide = British Empire. Scots played their part in this, however Scotland the Nation did not .. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antidote Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 15 minutes ago, stocky said: All done under the Union Flag.. Glasgow was made rich, as was the British Empire under the Union Jack.. Slavery, pillage, Theft and genocide = British Empire. Scots played their part in this, however Scotland the Nation did not .. Maybe the same type of Scots we have nowadays that suck up to the London establishment, the heart of the British empire, with a fawning eagerness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 ^^ Oh dear God. It's as if education never happened. Excuses, lies and falsehoods. ^^ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exile Posted June 25, 2017 Share Posted June 25, 2017 (edited) BBC documentary reveals the truth about Scots and the US Declaration of Independence... [which] has long been a source of national pride, the truth may be somewhat different. A new BBC documentary reveals that many Scots in the new republic were in fact seen as "savage foreign mercenaries" and "enemies of the American nation". The findings form part of TV historian Neil Oliver's latest programme, The Hector: Scotland to Nova Scotia... [From the Express] But reading between the lines, it's to the extent that they were 'British loyalists' that they were distrusted, not as Scots nor 'savages' per se Edited June 25, 2017 by exile Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted June 25, 2017 Share Posted June 25, 2017 I don't even consider him a historian. He is an absolute khunt of the highest order. No wonder the BBC love him. And Neil. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hampden_loon2878 Posted June 25, 2017 Share Posted June 25, 2017 He is a man who absolutely hates scotland,,, he goes to great lengths not to even say the word... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaid Posted June 25, 2017 Share Posted June 25, 2017 1 hour ago, thplinth said: I don't even consider him a historian. He is an absolute khunt of the highest order. No wonder the BBC love him. And Neil. He's not actually a historian, he's an archelogist. 1 hour ago, exile said: BBC documentary reveals the truth about Scots and the US Declaration of Independence... [which] has long been a source of national pride, the truth may be somewhat different. A new BBC documentary reveals that many Scots in the new republic were in fact seen as "savage foreign mercenaries" and "enemies of the American nation". The findings form part of TV historian Neil Oliver's latest programme, The Hector: Scotland to Nova Scotia... [From the Express] But reading between the lines, it's to the extent that they were 'British loyalists' that they were distrusted, not as Scots nor 'savages' per se Well of course there's two sides to the involvement of Scots migrants in the American Revolutionary War a lot of which doesn't add up when you look at it from the current day. For example, a lot of the Highland Jacobites who had either been forceably transported as indentured servants or had emigrated on their own account fought on the Loyalist side. Most notable amongst this lot was the husband of Flora MacDonald. On the other hand, in the Appalachians, the Continental forces included a large number of Ulster Scots emigrants - the relatives of who are now loyalists and Unionists in present day Northern Ireland. I've a suspicion that this documentary will focus pretty much on the first lot and doubt the second lot will get much of a look in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ally Bongo Posted June 25, 2017 Share Posted June 25, 2017 3 hours ago, hampden_loon2878 said: He is a man who absolutely hates scotland,,, he goes to great lengths not to even say the word... Thats why he is always given work by the BBC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flure Posted June 26, 2017 Share Posted June 26, 2017 He and entourage came filming in my workplace. They were doing a documentary on "Industrialisition" or some such. He was a Diva. The film crew with him were doing the "eye rolling" thing behind his back. He didn't come across that day as a very nice person. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weekevie04 Posted June 26, 2017 Share Posted June 26, 2017 His voice narration is grating too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exile Posted September 2, 2018 Share Posted September 2, 2018 Just came across this book Scotland's Future History by Stuart McHardy. https://www.luath.co.uk/history/scotlands-future-history One of the main themes is that so called Scottish history is too often viewed from the point of view of not only British/English worldview, but also from a classical, pro-Roman, Mediterranean perspective (compounded by Christianity) which has emphasised the importance of the Mediterranean/continental Europe as the centre and Scotland as the periphery (even within Scotland, focus tends to be on kings of mainland Scotland, not the Hebrides, Orkney or Shetland). Also the power of writing - history written and recorded by the Romans and Christian points of view, denying or suppressing the indigenous political religious and linguistic points of view. He also covers where the Scots came from (Scotland not Ireland), Jacobites, language, etc. One of the most interesting things is the distinction he makes between Scotland as an unconquered territory, versus England that became a colony for 400 years. It was natural for 'England' (Britain) as an occupied colony for hundreds of years, with civil administration, towns and cities and all, to become Romanised to some extent and to see things from a Roman point of view, seeing Roman culture as laudable etc., to see continental ways as civilised and hairy barbarians across the wall. And to write history from this worldview. However those north of Hadrians wall would have a different perspective, one that is lost to us. McHardy likens to Roman incursions int Scotland to Afghanistan, where the invaders never got a proper foothold, even if they clung on for a decade or two, they were never secure or settled, and gave up. But because of the way history is written and taught, we always get the Roman/British point of view. It's as if Afghanistan merged with India, but the Afghans were taught history from the point of view of Anglophile Indians, who appreciated the Brits for building railways. He admits he's biased towards a pro Scottish interpretation but this is an antidote for conventional historians pretending to be objective, and among other things is an antidote for the Neil Oliver view of the world (where Scotland is/was only a historical phase in a greater British history and where any prehistoric civilisation is branded British). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toepoke Posted September 2, 2018 Share Posted September 2, 2018 Recently discovered this pisstake of Oliver's historical deliveries... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neilser Posted September 6, 2018 Share Posted September 6, 2018 He was on Simon Mayo/Jo Whiley’s show tonight on Radio 2 promoting his book on the history of Britain in 100 places. Didn’t hear all of it but he was pushing the line that the British Isles are essentially all one place, on the basis that one side of a national border looks much the same as the other side. A bizarre and remarkably simplistic angle for a historian to take that could be applied anywhere else in the world - Greece and Turkey? - and takes no account of history. He ended up with a tortuous story about believing in yourselves and standing on your own feet, but which was clearly a Brit Nat parable rather than in favour of Scottish nationalism. The guy’s fairly odd... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.