Written by Frederica
In June 2020,, having been thoroughly wound-up by yet another assault on our history I wrote a poem – ‘In Defence of History’. I preface this episode of my ‘Grumpy Old Woman’ essays with a few lines that I feel are pertinent:
“A man with no past is no man
Without it how may he be wise
Learning and not domination
Must prevail for the World to arise
Come patriots all to the standard
Insist on your birthright today
Whate’er in the past that was shameful
We follow a new road and say
Those who destroy our back story
We will never allow to hold sway”
History is a record of where we (collectively) have been. It is a tapestry of time. Much of it is seen and documented through the eyes of those who were there and were able to chronicle its passage. History is a many-faceted saga created by illustrating people’s lives. Then, as now, the propaganda of the times was employed. Facts were embroidered and embellished by those with an agenda to fulfil. However, somehow the essential stories have shone through, made possible by the personal records and journal entries that have served to illustrate the living picture behind the basic timeline.
History is more than a collection of random data. It is a rich and glowing record of humankind that should inform and guide future generations through their own passage of time.
Family history is an important weapon in the armoury against all those who would tear down the record of Nationhood and evolution for purely political ends. Family records and experiences are a very necessary bulwark against the machinations of the anarchic destroyers of World history. It is said that ‘the victors write the history’. We live in uncertain and troublous times. Much is spoken and written about ‘Globalism’ and ‘World Domination’. In times to come, those family records will be invaluable in keeping alive the present-day story in much the same way as the old Norse people used their sagas, many of which survive to this day.
I read that the recent move to ‘de-colonise’ the English faculty of medieval works, such as Chaucer, and replace him with a reading list of modern BAME authors came from the £250,000 p.a. vice chancellor of Leicester University. From his name and derivation, I would surmise that he himself was a product of the colonies.
Chaucer was, primarily, a ‘civil servant’ at the time of Edward III. He was frequently at Court in that capacity. I do not think he had any illusions about himself and I do not think he took himself at all seriously. I think he was very pragmatic about life as he saw it around him. I do not think he was anything like the vain popinjays that frequent the corridors of power today.
Chaucer was a ‘people watcher’. He wrote his poetry for his own pleasure, not for gain (although I believe he might have read his work at Court). He satirised the foibles and flaws of his subjects as cleverly and effectively as some of the current MSM satirists are wont to do today. I doubt whether he made any money out of it himself during his own lifetime. His personal life had a pathos about it. He was brother-in-law to Lady Katherine Swynford who became the third Duchess of Lancaster and ancestress to a British royal line and an American President.
I think that those who would ‘remove’ him from literary history would do so because they no longer have the skills necessary to guide students through his work. It is ironic to think that at the time Chaucer was committing his works to parchment, The Commons was attempting to overthrow the established system and seize powers beyond their intended function of the times.
Why on earth are we allowing ourselves to be coerced into being submissively apologetic about our history? Destruction of history is the weapon of anarchists. Few things have made me more angry or contemptuous than the sight of politicians ‘taking the knee’. They should be protecting the Nation’s heritage. Instead they are rushing headlong down the road of ‘appeasement’, influencing police, sportspersons and ‘celebrities’ to follow where they lead!.
To what end? Do these mind-numbingly, stupid politicians really think that giving in to the encroachment of those who would use past-time actions of people, in eras that no-one alive today could have lived through or take responsibility for in real terms, will solve anything? Do these same, short-on-intelligence, ‘do anything for a headline’ zombies really imagine that, should the current history-hating aggressors ever get the upper hand, that they will not, in their turn, perpetrate the same kind of atrocities that they affirm their ancestors endured?
Much always wants more! Therefore, pandering to the anarchic trend will merely bring on more demands to cede more and more concessions to the emboldened and insatiable anarchists. These anarchists are using their revolutionary tactics to wage war upon the ‘history’ that they (rightly in many cases) deplore, purely for political ends in the modern world.
Since the early days of mankind, the instinct to explore and conquer has been part of the human psyche. It has been one of mankind’s less endearing traits. But let us be in no doubt. That trait still exists today as strongly as ever. Despite the outward shows of ‘Entente Cordiale’ and bonhomie, the instinct to dominate still prevails. The EU from which we have recently seceded is the latest in a long line of empire builders.
Before the EU, the French, Portuguese; Spanish and Austrians all had empires of their own. In our turn Britain was part of the Roman Empire for some 400 years. The Romans were noted slave owners and no doubt Britains were taken as slaves along with others from the countries which fell under Roman domination. The Russians, Chinese and Japanese have all had their turn at empire. Atrocities were undoubtedly committed against the dominated countries in every case.
The World turns. Times bring change. All empires eventually crumble. This is an incontrovertible truth. It should be learned from, properly regretted and never repeated.
Abasement by ‘bending the knee’ is a futile and frankly hypocritical virtue-signalling gesture that actually invites more aggression and serves to perpetuate the same evils that have gone before.
Cancelling history is, in itself, a form of conquest and domination. If the anarchic BLM etc., succeed in their aims of disorder and chaos they will, in reality, become the aggressors – drawn from the ranks of the ‘previously oppressed’.
History must not be suppressed or re-written. Our young must be taught history ‘in the raw – warts and all’ by teachers and historians who are brave enough to present the subject in an unbiased and pragmatic way that invites true and open discussion and debate. But, at all costs, history must be defended!