One should take this poll no more seriously than the one that asked whether the invasion of the Capitol in January was justified: they both give scope for schadenfreude/sour grapes.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
I had a feeling there would be some reactions like this, and I cannot say I really understand it. What if someone had received a hard copy and said they equally resented the assumption that people wish to use a hard copy for this? Would their resentment be less reasonable than your resentment? Is a hard copy census a god given right?
So long as the information is collected in the usual way and people are able to fill it in offline if they wish, what exactly is there to resent?
It's not as though they are taking a choice away from you. You never had a choice about how to fill out a census, other than in ways the government said you could. They are encouraging it to be in a different way without prohibiting the other.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
I had a feeling there would be some reactions like this, and I cannot say I really understand it. What if someone had received a hard copy and said they equally resented the assumption that people wish to use a hard copy for this? Would their resentment be less reasonable than your resentment? Is a hard copy census a god given right?
So long as the information is collected in the usual way and people are able to fill it in offline if they wish, what exactly is there to resent?
It's not as though they are taking a choice away from you. You never had a choice about how to fill out a census, other than in ways the government said you could. They are encouraging it to be in a different way without prohibiting the other.
I object to their assumption that people have access to the internet - or indeed a telephone. Happy to complete and hand to a collector in line with past practice - or to send via post.
Can you think why in current circumstances handing a paper copy to a collector might not be a good idea?
It can be done with care - in the same way I took delivery of beer this afternoon. Alternatively I am happy to return by post.
And why should your personal preference, when alternative methods exist for other people, trump public safety considerations or require so much additional cost to no additional benefit in terms of compliance?
I'm surprised how cross this has made me, but your objections, despite having the initial figleaf of regard for the public (albeit a nonsensical one as those unable to respond online can do so) seems to do with nothing other than arrogant assumption that you had a right to fill out the census in the way you want, and even though you acknowledge you can still do it you are still mad that they would prefer it be another way.
Since the option has not been taken away from anyone, why are you so offended that an alternative option has been offered? Do you get mad when someone brings out a new flavour of crisps because how dare they assume you want the new flavour?
Is the purpose of the census to gather information or to gather it in a way that makes you personally happy? So long as they get the info from us, what does it matter how?
He regularly posts here so clearly has no problem with using the internet. It is not clear to me what the fuss is. If someone doesn't have access to the internet, they can request the paper copy. What's the big deal?
Still waiting for my copy, by the way.
The Amazing Drakeford should be put on the case, he could sort it out immediately.
More seriously, I suppose give it to Monday? Time to contact and get one in time if so.
I frankly have better things to do with my time than chase a gang of third rate incompetents for a piece of paper a vaguely competent organisation could have sent out. Particularly given the huge amount of extra work the government is making me do right now.
They can have my census return if they send it. If they don’t, they won’t get it. Their lookout.
Fair enough. It is their responsibility to get it to you. They can hardly complain people don't fill it in if they don't get it.
Mine arrived yesterday.
As I mentioned earlier, We received our forms to fill in yesterday. We didn't ask for hard copy. It seems the default option in Wales is hard copy with online available if we wanted it.
That's quite possible. Did you get a Welsh language version too?
Yes, that's pretty standard for Wales, look you.
I suspect the Welsh government would have put up the funds to post out to all addresses.
In 2011 they wanted us to send Welsh questionnaires to more than just Wales. I can't remember the precise details, but I think they wanted a Welsh form to go to every Welsh postcode - some of which go into England.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
It is one reason why I would urge people these days to think very carefully before donating archaeological artefacts to museums. Far too many of them have decided they can no longer afford to keep the artefacts and have just skipped them. We had a real fight with Newark museum at the time of its conversion to the National Civil War Centre to prevent them dumping large amounts of ceramics and other artefacts dating back to the Roman period.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
But why would a museum chuck excess artefacts in the bin, as Richard alleges?
Insane. There must be hundreds of kids - in any sizeable town - with a passion for history who would be delighted, enlightened and energised by the outright gift of some Roman pottery shards or medieval glassware and so on. Give these things away.
I've got a collection of two dozen tiny little historic objects in my living room. I found them all myself which adds to their lustre, but I would love them anyway - a flint arrowhead from Gobekli Tepe, a bit of amphora handle from the Valley of the Shadow of Death, some shrapnel from Gallipoli, a Piece of Pol Pot's Patio.
I love these things. Historical objects are history you can touch. Priceless. Never bin them!
I lusted after a Gobekli Tepe arrowhead (there's no shortage of them) but didn't have the bottle to try to smuggle one out - my Turkish phrase book usefully gives the translation for "I am terribly sorry Mr Customs Officer, I had no idea about the savage penalties for unlicensed antiquity exports," and I have watched Midnight Express.
I remember when I found my Gobekli Tepe arrowhead I was almost overcome with excitement. I pocketed it eagerly (and clandestinely). Then I had a big spasm of guilt and looked around, with a mind to putting it back - then I realised I was standing on a hill of flints which was practically all arrowheads and axes. Thousands of them
So I kept it and took it home. And I can see it now as I type. An arrowhead knapped by the same hunter-gatherers who built the world's oldest structure, a veritable temple in Eden, maybe 12,000 years ago.
Marvellous
Arrowheads form a nice thematic thread though this topic, since, according to Herodotus, the Scythian king Ariantas had each of his nomadic subjects contribute an arrowhead to his census - on pain on death - as a simple means of estimating their population. Once these arrowheads were all collected, they were used to manufacture a giant bronze vessel of over 5000 gallons in volume to serve as a monument to his rule. And indeed that's the only reason anyone has ever heard of him...
That poll makes sense. A solid 35-40% of Scots are firmly YES/indy. Accords with all we know. There's a large soft middle, 20-30% of the country, who could be persuaded either way. 35-40% are hard NO.
Very close. On the upside, for the Nats, they just have to win over 10% of the country and they could win a Sindyref. On the downside, they don't have to lose many soft votes = they fail to get a majority. Momentum is lost. Sturgeon is in question. More scandals emerge.
This is a critical election for the SNP. If they win it, but don't win it by enough, they could fall apart, at speed
Fascinating to hear of the ructions in the local East Ham Labour Party which, along with West Ham CLP have both been suspended.
It seems this is about recruiting of members and may not be wholly unrelated to Momentum's attempts to take control of both local parties. I don't know whether Stephen Timms, the long-serving MP for East Ham, wa sunder threat of de-selection.
I've also heard (though unconfirmed) the candidate previously chosen for the East Ham Central by-election has been removed and a new candidate will be "provided". To be fair, given Labour won 81% of the vote in 2018, we could always test the adage anything with a red rosette could win the seat.
Perhaps a small carriage clock or a fern or a lightly-varnished table might be on the short list. The Conservatives have put up a candidate and he'll presumably be hoping against hope the inanimate object makes a serious gaffe as he needs all the help he can get to find the 33.5% swing needed to take the seat.
I'm quite sure I remember the OMRLP once standing a dog in a by-election. Sadly I imagine that the relevant legislative loophole has since been closed.
Quite right, given the recent decline of the Racing Post.
At last, a subject on this forum worthy of proper and serious discussion.
I remember with affection the Sporting Life which was my daily read (about all I had in common with Lester Piggott) and was really sad when it ceased and the RP took over.
Nonetheless, it was for a long period a decent read - Alan Byrne and Chris Smith were decent editors and there were plenty of ex-Life writers such as Alastair Down. Once I got used to the form layout - the Life did it so well - it was perfectly useable.
I think the rot set in with Bruce Millington - I don't quite know why. Part of it is the truth that betting is now so much more than horses and dogs so other sports have to be covered and to be fair the Post has some real experts (Steve Palmer on the golf is superb) but it's become a sports betting paper rather than the specialist horse racing paper it was.
At least I have something in common with @Leon - we both had our first Covid vaccinations today.
First thing, I thought I had uncovered a huge fraud in Government reporting when I thought I was going to be vaccinated 1100 times - until Mrs Stodge reminded me that was the time for the appointment.
Couldn't fault the logistics at Excel - the cavernous space was well organised and can clearly handle a lot more people than the trickle that was coming in this morning.
No side effects so far apart from a hankering for Chinese takeaway so no change there.
What time was yours? Mine was 3pm. I've been told that if you don't feel anything after 9 hours, you'll probably be fine (family anecdotage). So, I wait
I'm through the 10 and a half hour mark and apart from the Chinese takeaway urge (which is quite normal for me on a Friday night), I'm good. I had no reaction to the normal flu jab in December so I was cautiously optimistic.
I'll be happy with a good night's sleep and a breakfast featuring a full English and the Racing Post - I'm only getting one of the last two unfortunately.
A Chinese takeaway followed by a full English?
That's a full spread! Easy on the curry Saturday night maybe..
The under 30s are the most reactionary and anti-vax lot there are?
They should listen to their wiser elders.
To be fair the differences between the age groups are pretty small, and I suspect that a number of factors are in play in the younger age groups - not only hesitancy and feelings amongst some that they're not particularly in danger from the illness, but also concerns about falling ill with the side effects. A lot of people will be worried about having to look after children or hold down an insecure crapjob whilst sick.
The under 30s are the most reactionary and anti-vax lot there are?
They should listen to their wiser elders.
It's been the case throughout that the young have been less likely to say they will accept a vaccine. When raised a few months ago there was pushback that it was them being antivax as such, and I presume the numbers willing have risen as with other groups and it is not high, but I still cannot figure out a plausible explanation it should be particularly lower than other age groups. It was suggested partly it might be that they realised they would be at lesser risk generally, or that they would not be jabbed for a long time so there was not exactly urgency around the question, but these are hypotheticals about taking one when offered, so why would the latter affect that? So is it really just that more young people are prepared to take the risk?
What is there in an OECD report that anyone would want to suppress?
Their record on education?
At a wild guess, if the report was positive it would have been published.....
Given that the OECD report was only allowed to speak to people that the Scottish Government chose, and rejected evidence submissions from relevant figures because the Scottish Government didn't want them, if this report is actually damning in any way shape or form, it's actually a genre defining achievement in shit education by the SNP.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
Your low opinion of university libraries is correct. Once at the University of REDACTED, I attended a sale of surplus items. "A librarian's life is a constant battle against space", I was told.
There was amongst the discarded debris a first edition of Jane Austen's Sense and Sensibility
Being honest, I remonstrated that this book should be retained in the collection, which it was.
Well, until the next lunatick decides the library is short of space and needs to get rid of surplus stock that students don't need.
One of my favourite jokes is about an American who had been clearing out his mother’s house and came across a battered old Bible that he threw out without a second thought. He later mentioned to a friend that it had been printed by some German firm or other called Gutenburg.
‘You threw away one of the first Bibles ever printed!’ gasped his horrified friend. ‘One came up for auction at Christie’s last year and sold for $500,000!’
‘Mine wouldn’t have been worth a dime,’ retorted his Philistine friend. ‘Some clown by name of Martin Luther had scribbled all over it.’
Great though that story is, I'm not sure I believe it.
What is there in an OECD report that anyone would want to suppress?
Their record on education?
At a wild guess, if the report was positive it would have been published.....
Given that the OECD report was only allowed to speak to people that the Scottish Government chose, and rejected evidence submissions from relevant figures because the Scottish Government didn't want them, if this report is actually damning in any way shape or form, it's actually a genre defining achievement in shit education by the SNP.
If that's the case then it might very well criticise the authorities for being wilfully obstructive. That wouldn't be a good look either - especially under present circumstances.
The under 30s are the most reactionary and anti-vax lot there are?
They should listen to their wiser elders.
It's been the case throughout that the young have been less likely to say they will accept a vaccine. When raised a few months ago there was pushback that it was them being antivax as such, and I presume the numbers willing have risen as with other groups and it is not high, but I still cannot figure out a plausible explanation it should be particularly lower than other age groups. It was suggested partly it might be that they realised they would be at lesser risk generally, or that they would not be jabbed for a long time so there was not exactly urgency around the question, but these are hypotheticals about taking one when offered, so why would the latter affect that? So is it really just that more young people are prepared to take the risk?
To be fair looking at it for the under 30s its still only ~5% or so saying no, with another 5% saying don't know. That's not bad.
It actually looks like there's marginally more refusing in the 30 to 49s, due to the "have been offered but refused" element which is even worse.
But overall its a great result. If there were ever a political poll with that much blue and that little red I'd be made up. 😉
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
Your low opinion of university libraries is correct. Once at the University of REDACTED, I attended a sale of surplus items. "A librarian's life is a constant battle against space", I was told.
There was amongst the discarded debris a first edition of Jane Austen's Sense and Sensibility
Being honest, I remonstrated that this book should be retained in the collection, which it was.
Well, until the next lunatick decides the library is short of space and needs to get rid of surplus stock that students don't need.
One of my favourite jokes is about an American who had been clearing out his mother’s house and came across a battered old Bible that he threw out without a second thought. He later mentioned to a friend that it had been printed by some German firm or other called Gutenburg.
‘You threw away one of the first Bibles ever printed!’ gasped his horrified friend. ‘One came up for auction at Christie’s last year and sold for $500,000!’
‘Mine wouldn’t have been worth a dime,’ retorted his Philistine friend. ‘Some clown by name of Martin Luther had scribbled all over it.’
Great though that story is, I'm not sure I believe it.
I've been in staff development meetings where the triumphs of British Cycling were given as a motivational example of what you can achieve by obsessive attention to detail.
So, no; I suppose I didn't entirely believe them. It's sad but true that outlier success is frequently due to either a bit of random noise or undetected cheating. Not always, but frequently.
Until one of the cyclists admits it we'll never quite be sure. A lot of cycling was pretty unscientific until Chris Boardman turned up on his Lotus, so there probably was scope for gains to be made.
Not so much now.
Still, it continues to annoy the French that they can't win their own race.
It isn't as if drugs aren't rife in other sports. Rugby seems to be a particular hotspot.
The under 30s are the most reactionary and anti-vax lot there are?
They should listen to their wiser elders.
It's been the case throughout that the young have been less likely to say they will accept a vaccine. When raised a few months ago there was pushback that it was them being antivax as such, and I presume the numbers willing have risen as with other groups and it is not high, but I still cannot figure out a plausible explanation it should be particularly lower than other age groups. It was suggested partly it might be that they realised they would be at lesser risk generally, or that they would not be jabbed for a long time so there was not exactly urgency around the question, but these are hypotheticals about taking one when offered, so why would the latter affect that? So is it really just that more young people are prepared to take the risk?
To be fair looking at it for the under 30s its still only ~5% or so saying no, with another 5% saying don't know. That's not bad.
Indeed. But I still cannot understand why it is higher, though whether it pans out when it gets to an actual offer we shall see.
The under 30s are the most reactionary and anti-vax lot there are?
They should listen to their wiser elders.
It's been the case throughout that the young have been less likely to say they will accept a vaccine. When raised a few months ago there was pushback that it was them being antivax as such, and I presume the numbers willing have risen as with other groups and it is not high, but I still cannot figure out a plausible explanation it should be particularly lower than other age groups. It was suggested partly it might be that they realised they would be at lesser risk generally, or that they would not be jabbed for a long time so there was not exactly urgency around the question, but these are hypotheticals about taking one when offered, so why would the latter affect that? So is it really just that more young people are prepared to take the risk?
Higher % of ethnic minorities, lower feeling of danger from virus, more susceptible to 'soft' anti-vax messages (effect on fertility, longer term unknown risks) etc etc
That's a full spread! Easy on the curry Saturday night maybe..
We really are covering all the big ticket subjects tonight - who cares about Scottish Independence, Covid or Europe?
The key to a Chinese is not to overplay your hand on the evening - some things only work when you have them hot and fresh but others actually improve for an evening and a gentle reheating the next day. Are you going for the quick scoff or the longer game?
Now, the Saturday morning full English - not to be confused with the working day mad rush - this is more what I would call English Brunch - it's the breakfast but slower, later and accompanied by a decent newspaper (see above). It is one of the few aspects of life I've genuinely missed in lockdown.
The question now is whether it's worth the risk to have an alfresco full English in a pub garden next month - pub breakfasts can be extremely good (obviously Wetherspoons is for weekday consumption only).
So don't expect much (any) movement on the 21st June great opening up then. By then, anyone who wants will have had one jab, the vulnerable two - and be two-three weeks into their antibody build as a minimum.
It really is quite difficult to see how the Covid virus find enough UK residents to infect after that. R = very close to 0? In practice, that will kick in weeks earlier. But - safety first will be the Govt. touchstone.
What is there in an OECD report that anyone would want to suppress?
Their record on education?
At a wild guess, if the report was positive it would have been published.....
Given that the OECD report was only allowed to speak to people that the Scottish Government chose, and rejected evidence submissions from relevant figures because the Scottish Government didn't want them, if this report is actually damning in any way shape or form, it's actually a genre defining achievement in shit education by the SNP.
If that's the case then it might very well criticise the authorities for being wilfully obstructive. That wouldn't be a good look either - especially under present circumstances.
I don't think they would do that - it seems to be the normal way with these reports. The UN is a bit like that isn't it? Go into African country x ruled by dictator x and produce a report saying it's all lovely and things are improving. This is why I'm so surprised that the report seems to be a shitter.
Etymologically speaking, is there a relation between the proper nouns "Kent" and "Cnut"?
Thus, does Men of Kent = Men of Cnut? While Kentish Men = Cnutish Men?
Accrording to Wiki:
The name Kent is believed to be of British Celtic origin. The meaning has been explained as 'coastal district,' 'corner-land' or 'land on the edge' (compare Welsh cant 'bordering of a circle, tire, edge,' Breton cant 'circle'). In Latin sources the area is called Cantia or Canticum, while the Anglo-Saxons referred to it as Cent, Cent lond or Centrice.[4][5]
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
It is one reason why I would urge people these days to think very carefully before donating archaeological artefacts to museums. Far too many of them have decided they can no longer afford to keep the artefacts and have just skipped them. We had a real fight with Newark museum at the time of its conversion to the National Civil War Centre to prevent them dumping large amounts of ceramics and other artefacts dating back to the Roman period.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
But why would a museum chuck excess artefacts in the bin, as Richard alleges?
Insane. There must be hundreds of kids - in any sizeable town - with a passion for history who would be delighted, enlightened and energised by the outright gift of some Roman pottery shards or medieval glassware and so on. Give these things away.
I've got a collection of two dozen tiny little historic objects in my living room. I found them all myself which adds to their lustre, but I would love them anyway - a flint arrowhead from Gobekli Tepe, a bit of amphora handle from the Valley of the Shadow of Death, some shrapnel from Gallipoli, a Piece of Pol Pot's Patio.
I love these things. Historical objects are history you can touch. Priceless. Never bin them!
I lusted after a Gobekli Tepe arrowhead (there's no shortage of them) but didn't have the bottle to try to smuggle one out - my Turkish phrase book usefully gives the translation for "I am terribly sorry Mr Customs Officer, I had no idea about the savage penalties for unlicensed antiquity exports," and I have watched Midnight Express.
I remember when I found my Gobekli Tepe arrowhead I was almost overcome with excitement. I pocketed it eagerly (and clandestinely). Then I had a big spasm of guilt and looked around, with a mind to putting it back - then I realised I was standing on a hill of flints which was practically all arrowheads and axes. Thousands of them
So I kept it and took it home. And I can see it now as I type. An arrowhead knapped by the same hunter-gatherers who built the world's oldest structure, a veritable temple in Eden, maybe 12,000 years ago.
Marvellous
Arrowheads form a nice thematic thread though this topic, since, according to Herodotus, the Scythian king Ariantas had each of his nomadic subjects contribute an arrowhead to his census - on pain on death - as a simple means of estimating their population. Once these arrowheads were all collected, they were used to manufacture a giant bronze vessel of over 5000 gallons in volume to serve as a monument to his rule. And indeed that's the only reason anyone has ever heard of him...
And our entire nation would be very different if it weren't for the arrow in Harold's eye
The Anglo-Saxons came quite close to winning at Hastings, DESPITE the handicap of having fought and won a brutal battle against the Norse, and King Harald Hardrada, a few days before. Like beating the Springboks then taking on the All Blacks, later that same weekend
If he'd won the 2nd battle, like the first, Harold Godwinsson would now be the greatest hero in English history, instead of a footnote, and an image on a tapestry. Discuss.
And the world would also be very different, shaped by a different Britain - or not shaped at all.
A more interesting point to me is about the Horizon programme. If it funded research that led to four out of the six main vaccines, and the companies concerned do appear to credit the programme, that's a huge success and one we don't really hear about. I am not talking about EU good/bad/whatever. The programme itself really seems to have delivered !
Evidence for that assertion please.
I suspect (and it's just a suspicion) that almost every vaccine programme will have taken money at some point from the Wellcome Trust, Horizon, regional development agencies, the UK government, and various others. That's the nature of something that was - until recently - pretty unfashionable, and where researchers will have spent their time grubbing for grants.
But having taken (at some point, and for some portion of related research) money from Horizon is very far from Horizon having been the - or even a - major funder.
Agree that funding is a hand-to-mouth exercise for all research institutes. Having looked into this a bit, Horizon is given major credit for funding primary research at the relevant institutes in these links for Jenner Institute, Bio-N-Tech and Janssen Laboratories/J&J, although the latter also got a lot of funding from the US government. Curevac got its original funding from the EU, but most of its primary research in recent years seems to have been funded by Bill Gates. It did get development funding from Horizon however.
Should add the important point that it is entirely because these labs did the unfashionable research for years that they were able to step in to get the vaccines developed in record time.
Investigating further, I think @rcs1000 hit the nail on the head with his comment about unfashionable research. The Covid vaccines come out of research into vaccines for diseases that affect poor countries, in particular ebola, where there is a high failure rate in the development of those vaccines. Funding requires bodies with deep pockets who don't care about commercial return. There seem to be three such bodies: EU Horizon, the US Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. We can be grateful to Bill Gates in particular, who funded research at Curevac over many years and kept Novavax going through a succession of failed vaccines.
The geographic distribution of the laboratories presumably reflects the availability of funding. The Novavax research originated in a Swedish laboratory that was taken over by Novavax, so arguably a fifth European lab.
Also a callout for the Gamaleya Research Institute who seem to have produced a good Sputnik V vaccine based on their research into MERS and ebola with rather little support. They are badly served by their government, but hopefully will get the recognition in the West that they deserve.
Some of the foundational work for the mRNA vaccines was funded by DARPA during the Obama administration.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
It is one reason why I would urge people these days to think very carefully before donating archaeological artefacts to museums. Far too many of them have decided they can no longer afford to keep the artefacts and have just skipped them. We had a real fight with Newark museum at the time of its conversion to the National Civil War Centre to prevent them dumping large amounts of ceramics and other artefacts dating back to the Roman period.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
But why would a museum chuck excess artefacts in the bin, as Richard alleges?
Insane. There must be hundreds of kids - in any sizeable town - with a passion for history who would be delighted, enlightened and energised by the outright gift of some Roman pottery shards or medieval glassware and so on. Give these things away.
I've got a collection of two dozen tiny little historic objects in my living room. I found them all myself which adds to their lustre, but I would love them anyway - a flint arrowhead from Gobekli Tepe, a bit of amphora handle from the Valley of the Shadow of Death, some shrapnel from Gallipoli, a Piece of Pol Pot's Patio.
I love these things. Historical objects are history you can touch. Priceless. Never bin them!
I lusted after a Gobekli Tepe arrowhead (there's no shortage of them) but didn't have the bottle to try to smuggle one out - my Turkish phrase book usefully gives the translation for "I am terribly sorry Mr Customs Officer, I had no idea about the savage penalties for unlicensed antiquity exports," and I have watched Midnight Express.
I remember when I found my Gobekli Tepe arrowhead I was almost overcome with excitement. I pocketed it eagerly (and clandestinely). Then I had a big spasm of guilt and looked around, with a mind to putting it back - then I realised I was standing on a hill of flints which was practically all arrowheads and axes. Thousands of them
So I kept it and took it home. And I can see it now as I type. An arrowhead knapped by the same hunter-gatherers who built the world's oldest structure, a veritable temple in Eden, maybe 12,000 years ago.
Marvellous
Arrowheads form a nice thematic thread though this topic, since, according to Herodotus, the Scythian king Ariantas had each of his nomadic subjects contribute an arrowhead to his census - on pain on death - as a simple means of estimating their population. Once these arrowheads were all collected, they were used to manufacture a giant bronze vessel of over 5000 gallons in volume to serve as a monument to his rule. And indeed that's the only reason anyone has ever heard of him...
Can't help thinking those arrowheads might have been better utilised stuck in their enemies....
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
It is one reason why I would urge people these days to think very carefully before donating archaeological artefacts to museums. Far too many of them have decided they can no longer afford to keep the artefacts and have just skipped them. We had a real fight with Newark museum at the time of its conversion to the National Civil War Centre to prevent them dumping large amounts of ceramics and other artefacts dating back to the Roman period.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
But why would a museum chuck excess artefacts in the bin, as Richard alleges?
Insane. There must be hundreds of kids - in any sizeable town - with a passion for history who would be delighted, enlightened and energised by the outright gift of some Roman pottery shards or medieval glassware and so on. Give these things away.
I've got a collection of two dozen tiny little historic objects in my living room. I found them all myself which adds to their lustre, but I would love them anyway - a flint arrowhead from Gobekli Tepe, a bit of amphora handle from the Valley of the Shadow of Death, some shrapnel from Gallipoli, a Piece of Pol Pot's Patio.
I love these things. Historical objects are history you can touch. Priceless. Never bin them!
I lusted after a Gobekli Tepe arrowhead (there's no shortage of them) but didn't have the bottle to try to smuggle one out - my Turkish phrase book usefully gives the translation for "I am terribly sorry Mr Customs Officer, I had no idea about the savage penalties for unlicensed antiquity exports," and I have watched Midnight Express.
I remember when I found my Gobekli Tepe arrowhead I was almost overcome with excitement. I pocketed it eagerly (and clandestinely). Then I had a big spasm of guilt and looked around, with a mind to putting it back - then I realised I was standing on a hill of flints which was practically all arrowheads and axes. Thousands of them
So I kept it and took it home. And I can see it now as I type. An arrowhead knapped by the same hunter-gatherers who built the world's oldest structure, a veritable temple in Eden, maybe 12,000 years ago.
Marvellous
Arrowheads form a nice thematic thread though this topic, since, according to Herodotus, the Scythian king Ariantas had each of his nomadic subjects contribute an arrowhead to his census - on pain on death - as a simple means of estimating their population. Once these arrowheads were all collected, they were used to manufacture a giant bronze vessel of over 5000 gallons in volume to serve as a monument to his rule. And indeed that's the only reason anyone has ever heard of him...
And our entire nation would be very different if it weren't for the arrow in Harold's eye
The Anglo-Saxons came quite close to winning at Hastings, DESPITE the handicap of having fought and won a brutal battle against the Norse, and King Harald Hardrada, a few days before. Like beating the Springboks then taking on the All Blacks, later that same weekend
If he'd won the 2nd battle, like the first, Harold Godwinsson would now be the greatest hero in English history, instead of a footnote, and an image on a tapestry. Discuss.
And the world would also be very different, shaped by a different Britain - or not shaped at all.
"the arrow in Harold's eye" = fake news Medieval-style, concocted by Norman spin-doctors.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
It is one reason why I would urge people these days to think very carefully before donating archaeological artefacts to museums. Far too many of them have decided they can no longer afford to keep the artefacts and have just skipped them. We had a real fight with Newark museum at the time of its conversion to the National Civil War Centre to prevent them dumping large amounts of ceramics and other artefacts dating back to the Roman period.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
But why would a museum chuck excess artefacts in the bin, as Richard alleges?
Insane. There must be hundreds of kids - in any sizeable town - with a passion for history who would be delighted, enlightened and energised by the outright gift of some Roman pottery shards or medieval glassware and so on. Give these things away.
I've got a collection of two dozen tiny little historic objects in my living room. I found them all myself which adds to their lustre, but I would love them anyway - a flint arrowhead from Gobekli Tepe, a bit of amphora handle from the Valley of the Shadow of Death, some shrapnel from Gallipoli, a Piece of Pol Pot's Patio.
I love these things. Historical objects are history you can touch. Priceless. Never bin them!
I lusted after a Gobekli Tepe arrowhead (there's no shortage of them) but didn't have the bottle to try to smuggle one out - my Turkish phrase book usefully gives the translation for "I am terribly sorry Mr Customs Officer, I had no idea about the savage penalties for unlicensed antiquity exports," and I have watched Midnight Express.
I remember when I found my Gobekli Tepe arrowhead I was almost overcome with excitement. I pocketed it eagerly (and clandestinely). Then I had a big spasm of guilt and looked around, with a mind to putting it back - then I realised I was standing on a hill of flints which was practically all arrowheads and axes. Thousands of them
So I kept it and took it home. And I can see it now as I type. An arrowhead knapped by the same hunter-gatherers who built the world's oldest structure, a veritable temple in Eden, maybe 12,000 years ago.
Marvellous
Arrowheads form a nice thematic thread though this topic, since, according to Herodotus, the Scythian king Ariantas had each of his nomadic subjects contribute an arrowhead to his census - on pain on death - as a simple means of estimating their population. Once these arrowheads were all collected, they were used to manufacture a giant bronze vessel of over 5000 gallons in volume to serve as a monument to his rule. And indeed that's the only reason anyone has ever heard of him...
And our entire nation would be very different if it weren't for the arrow in Harold's eye
The Anglo-Saxons came quite close to winning at Hastings, DESPITE the handicap of having fought and won a brutal battle against the Norse, and King Harald Hardrada, a few days before. Like beating the Springboks then taking on the All Blacks, later that same weekend
If he'd won the 2nd battle, like the first, Harold Godwinsson would now be the greatest hero in English history, instead of a footnote, and an image on a tapestry. Discuss.
And the world would also be very different, shaped by a different Britain - or not shaped at all.
I'm glad they won tbh. If you look at the words they brought in that the Saxons did not have - 'chair', 'curtain' - it was a tough old life before.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
It is one reason why I would urge people these days to think very carefully before donating archaeological artefacts to museums. Far too many of them have decided they can no longer afford to keep the artefacts and have just skipped them. We had a real fight with Newark museum at the time of its conversion to the National Civil War Centre to prevent them dumping large amounts of ceramics and other artefacts dating back to the Roman period.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
But why would a museum chuck excess artefacts in the bin, as Richard alleges?
Insane. There must be hundreds of kids - in any sizeable town - with a passion for history who would be delighted, enlightened and energised by the outright gift of some Roman pottery shards or medieval glassware and so on. Give these things away.
I've got a collection of two dozen tiny little historic objects in my living room. I found them all myself which adds to their lustre, but I would love them anyway - a flint arrowhead from Gobekli Tepe, a bit of amphora handle from the Valley of the Shadow of Death, some shrapnel from Gallipoli, a Piece of Pol Pot's Patio.
I love these things. Historical objects are history you can touch. Priceless. Never bin them!
I lusted after a Gobekli Tepe arrowhead (there's no shortage of them) but didn't have the bottle to try to smuggle one out - my Turkish phrase book usefully gives the translation for "I am terribly sorry Mr Customs Officer, I had no idea about the savage penalties for unlicensed antiquity exports," and I have watched Midnight Express.
I remember when I found my Gobekli Tepe arrowhead I was almost overcome with excitement. I pocketed it eagerly (and clandestinely). Then I had a big spasm of guilt and looked around, with a mind to putting it back - then I realised I was standing on a hill of flints which was practically all arrowheads and axes. Thousands of them
So I kept it and took it home. And I can see it now as I type. An arrowhead knapped by the same hunter-gatherers who built the world's oldest structure, a veritable temple in Eden, maybe 12,000 years ago.
Marvellous
Arrowheads form a nice thematic thread though this topic, since, according to Herodotus, the Scythian king Ariantas had each of his nomadic subjects contribute an arrowhead to his census - on pain on death - as a simple means of estimating their population. Once these arrowheads were all collected, they were used to manufacture a giant bronze vessel of over 5000 gallons in volume to serve as a monument to his rule. And indeed that's the only reason anyone has ever heard of him...
And our entire nation would be very different if it weren't for the arrow in Harold's eye
The Anglo-Saxons came quite close to winning at Hastings, DESPITE the handicap of having fought and won a brutal battle against the Norse, and King Harald Hardrada, a few days before. Like beating the Springboks then taking on the All Blacks, later that same weekend
If he'd won the 2nd battle, like the first, Harold Godwinsson would now be the greatest hero in English history, instead of a footnote, and an image on a tapestry. Discuss.
And the world would also be very different, shaped by a different Britain - or not shaped at all.
"the arrow in Harold's eye" = fake news Medieval-style, concocted by Norman spin-doctors.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
It is one reason why I would urge people these days to think very carefully before donating archaeological artefacts to museums. Far too many of them have decided they can no longer afford to keep the artefacts and have just skipped them. We had a real fight with Newark museum at the time of its conversion to the National Civil War Centre to prevent them dumping large amounts of ceramics and other artefacts dating back to the Roman period.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
But why would a museum chuck excess artefacts in the bin, as Richard alleges?
Insane. There must be hundreds of kids - in any sizeable town - with a passion for history who would be delighted, enlightened and energised by the outright gift of some Roman pottery shards or medieval glassware and so on. Give these things away.
I've got a collection of two dozen tiny little historic objects in my living room. I found them all myself which adds to their lustre, but I would love them anyway - a flint arrowhead from Gobekli Tepe, a bit of amphora handle from the Valley of the Shadow of Death, some shrapnel from Gallipoli, a Piece of Pol Pot's Patio.
I love these things. Historical objects are history you can touch. Priceless. Never bin them!
I lusted after a Gobekli Tepe arrowhead (there's no shortage of them) but didn't have the bottle to try to smuggle one out - my Turkish phrase book usefully gives the translation for "I am terribly sorry Mr Customs Officer, I had no idea about the savage penalties for unlicensed antiquity exports," and I have watched Midnight Express.
I remember when I found my Gobekli Tepe arrowhead I was almost overcome with excitement. I pocketed it eagerly (and clandestinely). Then I had a big spasm of guilt and looked around, with a mind to putting it back - then I realised I was standing on a hill of flints which was practically all arrowheads and axes. Thousands of them
So I kept it and took it home. And I can see it now as I type. An arrowhead knapped by the same hunter-gatherers who built the world's oldest structure, a veritable temple in Eden, maybe 12,000 years ago.
Marvellous
Arrowheads form a nice thematic thread though this topic, since, according to Herodotus, the Scythian king Ariantas had each of his nomadic subjects contribute an arrowhead to his census - on pain on death - as a simple means of estimating their population. Once these arrowheads were all collected, they were used to manufacture a giant bronze vessel of over 5000 gallons in volume to serve as a monument to his rule. And indeed that's the only reason anyone has ever heard of him...
And our entire nation would be very different if it weren't for the arrow in Harold's eye
The Anglo-Saxons came quite close to winning at Hastings, DESPITE the handicap of having fought and won a brutal battle against the Norse, and King Harald Hardrada, a few days before. Like beating the Springboks then taking on the All Blacks, later that same weekend
If he'd won the 2nd battle, like the first, Harold Godwinsson would now be the greatest hero in English history, instead of a footnote, and an image on a tapestry. Discuss.
And the world would also be very different, shaped by a different Britain - or not shaped at all.
I'm glad they won tbh. If you look at the words they brought in that the Saxons did not have - 'chair', 'curtain' - it was a tough old life before.
Modern luxuries we could do without in my opinion!
So don't expect much (any) movement on the 21st June great opening up then. By then, anyone who wants will have had one jab, the vulnerable two - and be two-three weeks into their antibody build as a minimum.
It really is quite difficult to see how the Covid virus find enough UK residents to infect after that. R = very close to 0? In practice, that will kick in weeks earlier. But - safety first will be the Govt. touchstone.
21 June for nightclubs and large events seems fair enough. Getting unvaccinated young people clubbing doesn't seem like a good idea weeks before they get vaccinated.
But sticking to late May for opening indoor hospitality is bloody crazy and a real wasted spring. That really should be escalated post Easter.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
It is one reason why I would urge people these days to think very carefully before donating archaeological artefacts to museums. Far too many of them have decided they can no longer afford to keep the artefacts and have just skipped them. We had a real fight with Newark museum at the time of its conversion to the National Civil War Centre to prevent them dumping large amounts of ceramics and other artefacts dating back to the Roman period.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
But why would a museum chuck excess artefacts in the bin, as Richard alleges?
Insane. There must be hundreds of kids - in any sizeable town - with a passion for history who would be delighted, enlightened and energised by the outright gift of some Roman pottery shards or medieval glassware and so on. Give these things away.
I've got a collection of two dozen tiny little historic objects in my living room. I found them all myself which adds to their lustre, but I would love them anyway - a flint arrowhead from Gobekli Tepe, a bit of amphora handle from the Valley of the Shadow of Death, some shrapnel from Gallipoli, a Piece of Pol Pot's Patio.
I love these things. Historical objects are history you can touch. Priceless. Never bin them!
I lusted after a Gobekli Tepe arrowhead (there's no shortage of them) but didn't have the bottle to try to smuggle one out - my Turkish phrase book usefully gives the translation for "I am terribly sorry Mr Customs Officer, I had no idea about the savage penalties for unlicensed antiquity exports," and I have watched Midnight Express.
I remember when I found my Gobekli Tepe arrowhead I was almost overcome with excitement. I pocketed it eagerly (and clandestinely). Then I had a big spasm of guilt and looked around, with a mind to putting it back - then I realised I was standing on a hill of flints which was practically all arrowheads and axes. Thousands of them
So I kept it and took it home. And I can see it now as I type. An arrowhead knapped by the same hunter-gatherers who built the world's oldest structure, a veritable temple in Eden, maybe 12,000 years ago.
Marvellous
Arrowheads form a nice thematic thread though this topic, since, according to Herodotus, the Scythian king Ariantas had each of his nomadic subjects contribute an arrowhead to his census - on pain on death - as a simple means of estimating their population. Once these arrowheads were all collected, they were used to manufacture a giant bronze vessel of over 5000 gallons in volume to serve as a monument to his rule. And indeed that's the only reason anyone has ever heard of him...
And our entire nation would be very different if it weren't for the arrow in Harold's eye
The Anglo-Saxons came quite close to winning at Hastings, DESPITE the handicap of having fought and won a brutal battle against the Norse, and King Harald Hardrada, a few days before. Like beating the Springboks then taking on the All Blacks, later that same weekend
If he'd won the 2nd battle, like the first, Harold Godwinsson would now be the greatest hero in English history, instead of a footnote, and an image on a tapestry. Discuss.
And the world would also be very different, shaped by a different Britain - or not shaped at all.
English victory at Hastings is an alternative history favourite, though frankly it's so far back in time and would represent such a significant deviation from established events that its long-term effects can only be vaguely guessed at.
On conversion therapy. Tbf to the government, which is not my instinct, they always intended to do this. Unfortunately, this is an area which is hugely legislatively complex. No country has made it illegal where they don't have therapy as a profession. We don't. Define conversion. Define therapy. Then who judges? There is no professional body as for teachers, doctors and lawyers. Literally anyone can offer therapy. We could have @Casino_Royale offering anger management or @Leon offering Zen like equanimity. And that is before the religious angle.
There is obv a huge back story here of which I am unaware, but this is fraught with difficulty. What about adults who positively want to be subjected to conversion therapy? Or to explore with a therapist the issue of whether they are convertible?
I think it's outrageous anyone thinks banning this is appropriate.
If someone experiences same sex attraction, but for whatever reason doesn't want it (maybe they want both a partner and a biological child with them), why shouldn't they seek therapy to change? I've no idea if such therapy can ever be successful, but I very much doubt there is any objective data either way. If someone wants to give it a try, what exactly is the harm? If it works, great, they get what they wanted. If it doesn't, well they shouldn't be any worse off. If we are going to ban stuff for being utterly ineffective, maybe start with homeopathy.
This isn't the same as saying its OK to pile pressure to try therapy on those who don't want to change, but that's a different issue entirely.
I've been in staff development meetings where the triumphs of British Cycling were given as a motivational example of what you can achieve by obsessive attention to detail.
So, no; I suppose I didn't entirely believe them. It's sad but true that outlier success is frequently due to either a bit of random noise or undetected cheating. Not always, but frequently.
Until one of the cyclists admits it we'll never quite be sure. A lot of cycling was pretty unscientific until Chris Boardman turned up on his Lotus, so there probably was scope for gains to be made.
Not so much now.
Still, it continues to annoy the French that they can't win their own race.
It isn't as if drugs aren't rife in other sports. Rugby seems to be a particular hotspot.
Any sport that makes loads of money will have doping. So, yes, rugby. Also cricket
That poll makes sense. A solid 35-40% of Scots are firmly YES/indy. Accords with all we know. There's a large soft middle, 20-30% of the country, who could be persuaded either way. 35-40% are hard NO.
Very close. On the upside, for the Nats, they just have to win over 10% of the country and they could win a Sindyref. On the downside, they don't have to lose many soft votes = they fail to get a majority. Momentum is lost. Sturgeon is in question. More scandals emerge.
This is a critical election for the SNP. If they win it, but don't win it by enough, they could fall apart, at speed
Democracy, SNP version:
“ So let’s have some specifics, four local candidates were interested in the seat. Only one was interviewed, the other three were not even given the courtesy of an interview. The “lucky” local candidate who was granted an interview was advised of this at 10.30 pm on Saturday 6th March and given a time of 2.15 pm on the Sunday 7th March. Needless to say they did not pass, nobody conveyed this to the Constituency Convener and he had to find out from others. HQ did announce at 15.30 pm on the 9th March the two favoured names, the only names, that would be on the ballot paper. The ballot papers were issued at 17.30 the same day.
The two favoured candidates are a Tracy Carragher who was involved in the branch in Coatbridge that was suspended. She is thought to have been involved in that bust up. She works in the office of another SNP MSP. The other approved candidate is Anun Qaiser- Javeed. She is reported to be a close friend of the Justice Minister. The constituency were not offered the possibility of a Zoom hustings. The members know nothing about either candidate other than one side of an A4 sheet that was circulated with the ballot information.”
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
It is one reason why I would urge people these days to think very carefully before donating archaeological artefacts to museums. Far too many of them have decided they can no longer afford to keep the artefacts and have just skipped them. We had a real fight with Newark museum at the time of its conversion to the National Civil War Centre to prevent them dumping large amounts of ceramics and other artefacts dating back to the Roman period.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
But why would a museum chuck excess artefacts in the bin, as Richard alleges?
Insane. There must be hundreds of kids - in any sizeable town - with a passion for history who would be delighted, enlightened and energised by the outright gift of some Roman pottery shards or medieval glassware and so on. Give these things away.
I've got a collection of two dozen tiny little historic objects in my living room. I found them all myself which adds to their lustre, but I would love them anyway - a flint arrowhead from Gobekli Tepe, a bit of amphora handle from the Valley of the Shadow of Death, some shrapnel from Gallipoli, a Piece of Pol Pot's Patio.
I love these things. Historical objects are history you can touch. Priceless. Never bin them!
I lusted after a Gobekli Tepe arrowhead (there's no shortage of them) but didn't have the bottle to try to smuggle one out - my Turkish phrase book usefully gives the translation for "I am terribly sorry Mr Customs Officer, I had no idea about the savage penalties for unlicensed antiquity exports," and I have watched Midnight Express.
I remember when I found my Gobekli Tepe arrowhead I was almost overcome with excitement. I pocketed it eagerly (and clandestinely). Then I had a big spasm of guilt and looked around, with a mind to putting it back - then I realised I was standing on a hill of flints which was practically all arrowheads and axes. Thousands of them
So I kept it and took it home. And I can see it now as I type. An arrowhead knapped by the same hunter-gatherers who built the world's oldest structure, a veritable temple in Eden, maybe 12,000 years ago.
Marvellous
Arrowheads form a nice thematic thread though this topic, since, according to Herodotus, the Scythian king Ariantas had each of his nomadic subjects contribute an arrowhead to his census - on pain on death - as a simple means of estimating their population. Once these arrowheads were all collected, they were used to manufacture a giant bronze vessel of over 5000 gallons in volume to serve as a monument to his rule. And indeed that's the only reason anyone has ever heard of him...
And our entire nation would be very different if it weren't for the arrow in Harold's eye
The Anglo-Saxons came quite close to winning at Hastings, DESPITE the handicap of having fought and won a brutal battle against the Norse, and King Harald Hardrada, a few days before. Like beating the Springboks then taking on the All Blacks, later that same weekend
If he'd won the 2nd battle, like the first, Harold Godwinsson would now be the greatest hero in English history, instead of a footnote, and an image on a tapestry. Discuss.
And the world would also be very different, shaped by a different Britain - or not shaped at all.
English victory at Hastings is an alternative history favourite, though frankly it's so far back in time and would represent such a significant deviation from established events that its long-term effects can only be vaguely guessed at.
And who is to say the Normans wouldn't have been back another year. They weren't know for just sitting around and enjoying what they had already.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
Your low opinion of university libraries is correct. Once at the University of REDACTED, I attended a sale of surplus items. "A librarian's life is a constant battle against space", I was told.
There was amongst the discarded debris a first edition of Jane Austen's Sense and Sensibility
Being honest, I remonstrated that this book should be retained in the collection, which it was.
Well, until the next lunatick decides the library is short of space and needs to get rid of surplus stock that students don't need.
On a similar vein, a few years ago I was doing research for a book on the British Interventions in Southern Russia in 1918 at the Brotherton Library in Leeds. I was going through accounts and diaries from WW1 veterans and found a box of a young officer in the Machine Gun Corps who travelled all the way to Baku on the Caspian and won the Military Cross on his first night there.
As I went through the box I found, tucked away in the bottom, the very medal he had won. Knowing they are of some value I took it to the desk but the lady there seemed surprised that it was of any value. To be honest anyone could have walked away with it. I had a chat with the librarians and they said they would do a search of the other boxes to make sure there were no further valuables tucked away.
Etymologically speaking, is there a relation between the proper nouns "Kent" and "Cnut"?
Thus, does Men of Kent = Men of Cnut? While Kentish Men = Cnutish Men?
No. “Kent” is actually one of the oldest surviving place names in England. It derives from theCeltic tribe who inhabited South East England from the Thames to the south coast. The Roman's called the people the Cantii or Cantiaci and the county Cantium. “Canterbury” comes from the Roman “Durovernum Cantiacorum” then, when Jutish influence became prevalent, it became known in Old English as Cantwareburh “stronghold of the Kentish men".
The Men of Kent/Kentish Men thing has a number of theories but may have had something to do with differing feudal systems either side of the River Medway.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
It is one reason why I would urge people these days to think very carefully before donating archaeological artefacts to museums. Far too many of them have decided they can no longer afford to keep the artefacts and have just skipped them. We had a real fight with Newark museum at the time of its conversion to the National Civil War Centre to prevent them dumping large amounts of ceramics and other artefacts dating back to the Roman period.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
But why would a museum chuck excess artefacts in the bin, as Richard alleges?
Insane. There must be hundreds of kids - in any sizeable town - with a passion for history who would be delighted, enlightened and energised by the outright gift of some Roman pottery shards or medieval glassware and so on. Give these things away.
I've got a collection of two dozen tiny little historic objects in my living room. I found them all myself which adds to their lustre, but I would love them anyway - a flint arrowhead from Gobekli Tepe, a bit of amphora handle from the Valley of the Shadow of Death, some shrapnel from Gallipoli, a Piece of Pol Pot's Patio.
I love these things. Historical objects are history you can touch. Priceless. Never bin them!
I lusted after a Gobekli Tepe arrowhead (there's no shortage of them) but didn't have the bottle to try to smuggle one out - my Turkish phrase book usefully gives the translation for "I am terribly sorry Mr Customs Officer, I had no idea about the savage penalties for unlicensed antiquity exports," and I have watched Midnight Express.
I remember when I found my Gobekli Tepe arrowhead I was almost overcome with excitement. I pocketed it eagerly (and clandestinely). Then I had a big spasm of guilt and looked around, with a mind to putting it back - then I realised I was standing on a hill of flints which was practically all arrowheads and axes. Thousands of them
So I kept it and took it home. And I can see it now as I type. An arrowhead knapped by the same hunter-gatherers who built the world's oldest structure, a veritable temple in Eden, maybe 12,000 years ago.
Marvellous
Arrowheads form a nice thematic thread though this topic, since, according to Herodotus, the Scythian king Ariantas had each of his nomadic subjects contribute an arrowhead to his census - on pain on death - as a simple means of estimating their population. Once these arrowheads were all collected, they were used to manufacture a giant bronze vessel of over 5000 gallons in volume to serve as a monument to his rule. And indeed that's the only reason anyone has ever heard of him...
And our entire nation would be very different if it weren't for the arrow in Harold's eye
The Anglo-Saxons came quite close to winning at Hastings, DESPITE the handicap of having fought and won a brutal battle against the Norse, and King Harald Hardrada, a few days before. Like beating the Springboks then taking on the All Blacks, later that same weekend
If he'd won the 2nd battle, like the first, Harold Godwinsson would now be the greatest hero in English history, instead of a footnote, and an image on a tapestry. Discuss.
And the world would also be very different, shaped by a different Britain - or not shaped at all.
I'm glad they won tbh. If you look at the words they brought in that the Saxons did not have - 'chair', 'curtain' - it was a tough old life before.
I've been in staff development meetings where the triumphs of British Cycling were given as a motivational example of what you can achieve by obsessive attention to detail.
So, no; I suppose I didn't entirely believe them. It's sad but true that outlier success is frequently due to either a bit of random noise or undetected cheating. Not always, but frequently.
Until one of the cyclists admits it we'll never quite be sure. A lot of cycling was pretty unscientific until Chris Boardman turned up on his Lotus, so there probably was scope for gains to be made.
Not so much now.
Still, it continues to annoy the French that they can't win their own race.
It isn't as if drugs aren't rife in other sports. Rugby seems to be a particular hotspot.
Any sport that makes loads of money will have doping. So, yes, rugby. Also cricket
Sports that are absolutely dependent on physical capacity all will have widespread doping. There is no way all those beasts of rugby players are natural.
Cricket, until T20, I don't think a huge amount to be gained from being on PEDs...but now it is similar to homerun hitters in baseball, big bucks if you can regularly muscle the ball over the boundary.
So don't expect much (any) movement on the 21st June great opening up then. By then, anyone who wants will have had one jab, the vulnerable two - and be two-three weeks into their antibody build as a minimum.
It really is quite difficult to see how the Covid virus find enough UK residents to infect after that. R = very close to 0? In practice, that will kick in weeks earlier. But - safety first will be the Govt. touchstone.
I think that’s what the country wants. People also need to feel safe and, by June 21, most will. The virus will find those whomp won’t take it and those whose immune systems are compromised. And a small number of kids.
On conversion therapy. Tbf to the government, which is not my instinct, they always intended to do this. Unfortunately, this is an area which is hugely legislatively complex. No country has made it illegal where they don't have therapy as a profession. We don't. Define conversion. Define therapy. Then who judges? There is no professional body as for teachers, doctors and lawyers. Literally anyone can offer therapy. We could have @Casino_Royale offering anger management or @Leon offering Zen like equanimity. And that is before the religious angle.
There is obv a huge back story here of which I am unaware, but this is fraught with difficulty. What about adults who positively want to be subjected to conversion therapy? Or to explore with a therapist the issue of whether they are convertible?
I think it's outrageous anyone thinks banning this is appropriate.
If someone experiences same sex attraction, but for whatever reason doesn't want it (maybe they want both a partner and a biological child with them), why shouldn't they seek therapy to change? I've no idea if such therapy can ever be successful, but I very much doubt there is any objective data either way. If someone wants to give it a try, what exactly is the harm? If it works, great, they get what they wanted. If it doesn't, well they shouldn't be any worse off. If we are going to ban stuff for being utterly ineffective, maybe start with homeopathy.
This isn't the same as saying its OK to pile pressure to try therapy on those who don't want to change, but that's a different issue entirely.
Conversion therapy is a load of bollocks, but amusingly enough, infamous Trump-simp and grifter Milo Yiannopoulos would agree with you, since he's just come out as, er, straight:
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
It is one reason why I would urge people these days to think very carefully before donating archaeological artefacts to museums. Far too many of them have decided they can no longer afford to keep the artefacts and have just skipped them. We had a real fight with Newark museum at the time of its conversion to the National Civil War Centre to prevent them dumping large amounts of ceramics and other artefacts dating back to the Roman period.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
But why would a museum chuck excess artefacts in the bin, as Richard alleges?
Insane. There must be hundreds of kids - in any sizeable town - with a passion for history who would be delighted, enlightened and energised by the outright gift of some Roman pottery shards or medieval glassware and so on. Give these things away.
I've got a collection of two dozen tiny little historic objects in my living room. I found them all myself which adds to their lustre, but I would love them anyway - a flint arrowhead from Gobekli Tepe, a bit of amphora handle from the Valley of the Shadow of Death, some shrapnel from Gallipoli, a Piece of Pol Pot's Patio.
I love these things. Historical objects are history you can touch. Priceless. Never bin them!
I lusted after a Gobekli Tepe arrowhead (there's no shortage of them) but didn't have the bottle to try to smuggle one out - my Turkish phrase book usefully gives the translation for "I am terribly sorry Mr Customs Officer, I had no idea about the savage penalties for unlicensed antiquity exports," and I have watched Midnight Express.
I remember when I found my Gobekli Tepe arrowhead I was almost overcome with excitement. I pocketed it eagerly (and clandestinely). Then I had a big spasm of guilt and looked around, with a mind to putting it back - then I realised I was standing on a hill of flints which was practically all arrowheads and axes. Thousands of them
So I kept it and took it home. And I can see it now as I type. An arrowhead knapped by the same hunter-gatherers who built the world's oldest structure, a veritable temple in Eden, maybe 12,000 years ago.
Marvellous
Arrowheads form a nice thematic thread though this topic, since, according to Herodotus, the Scythian king Ariantas had each of his nomadic subjects contribute an arrowhead to his census - on pain on death - as a simple means of estimating their population. Once these arrowheads were all collected, they were used to manufacture a giant bronze vessel of over 5000 gallons in volume to serve as a monument to his rule. And indeed that's the only reason anyone has ever heard of him...
And our entire nation would be very different if it weren't for the arrow in Harold's eye
The Anglo-Saxons came quite close to winning at Hastings, DESPITE the handicap of having fought and won a brutal battle against the Norse, and King Harald Hardrada, a few days before. Like beating the Springboks then taking on the All Blacks, later that same weekend
If he'd won the 2nd battle, like the first, Harold Godwinsson would now be the greatest hero in English history, instead of a footnote, and an image on a tapestry. Discuss.
And the world would also be very different, shaped by a different Britain - or not shaped at all.
English victory at Hastings is an alternative history favourite, though frankly it's so far back in time and would represent such a significant deviation from established events that its long-term effects can only be vaguely guessed at.
And who is to say the Normans wouldn't have been back another year. They weren't know for just sitting around and enjoying what they had already.
But the Normans would probably have turned west and south rather than north. Invading and conquering England is very hard. Note that no one has succeeded since. The Spanish vowed to try a 2nd time after the failure of the armada, but, in the end, they didn't. Nerves failed.
The Normans, after a failure in England, would have had a go at Brittany, or gone down the French coast to Aquitaine. Much easier.
And of course after winning at Hastings a triumphant and vindicated Harold Godwinsson would 1, have shored up his defences and 2, might have gone on the offensive himself, now rid of any Viking threat from the east
In other news, it's now been a whole year since I have been on or in:
Checked out of a hotel (Aberdeen) A taxi (Aberdeen city to airport) An airliner (Aberdeen to Southend) A main line train (Southend to Shenfield, Shenfield to Romford) A bus (Romford to Ilford (North)).
Though since Lockdown started, I have twice been on the Tube (short journeys round the lightly used Hainault Loop on the Central line), in September and December.
That's a full spread! Easy on the curry Saturday night maybe..
We really are covering all the big ticket subjects tonight - who cares about Scottish Independence, Covid or Europe?
The key to a Chinese is not to overplay your hand on the evening - some things only work when you have them hot and fresh but others actually improve for an evening and a gentle reheating the next day. Are you going for the quick scoff or the longer game?
Now, the Saturday morning full English - not to be confused with the working day mad rush - this is more what I would call English Brunch - it's the breakfast but slower, later and accompanied by a decent newspaper (see above). It is one of the few aspects of life I've genuinely missed in lockdown.
The question now is whether it's worth the risk to have an alfresco full English in a pub garden next month - pub breakfasts can be extremely good (obviously Wetherspoons is for weekday consumption only).
Stodge indeed.
Until lockdown I found cooking a full English too much hassle, but recently I’ve become quite adept. But it’s still not the same. To venture out again with a decent book, and have one cooked for me, is one of the things I look forward to most.
On conversion therapy. Tbf to the government, which is not my instinct, they always intended to do this. Unfortunately, this is an area which is hugely legislatively complex. No country has made it illegal where they don't have therapy as a profession. We don't. Define conversion. Define therapy. Then who judges? There is no professional body as for teachers, doctors and lawyers. Literally anyone can offer therapy. We could have @Casino_Royale offering anger management or @Leon offering Zen like equanimity. And that is before the religious angle.
There is obv a huge back story here of which I am unaware, but this is fraught with difficulty. What about adults who positively want to be subjected to conversion therapy? Or to explore with a therapist the issue of whether they are convertible?
I think it's outrageous anyone thinks banning this is appropriate.
If someone experiences same sex attraction, but for whatever reason doesn't want it (maybe they want both a partner and a biological child with them), why shouldn't they seek therapy to change? I've no idea if such therapy can ever be successful, but I very much doubt there is any objective data either way. If someone wants to give it a try, what exactly is the harm? If it works, great, they get what they wanted. If it doesn't, well they shouldn't be any worse off. If we are going to ban stuff for being utterly ineffective, maybe start with homeopathy.
This isn't the same as saying its OK to pile pressure to try therapy on those who don't want to change, but that's a different issue entirely.
Conversion therapy is a load of bollocks, but amusingly enough, infamous Trump-simp and grifter Milo Yiannopoulos would agree with you, since he's just come out as, er, straight:
He went to my school. In fact I think he was a first former when I was doing my A-Levels. I should have bullied the little shit to an inch of his life.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
It is one reason why I would urge people these days to think very carefully before donating archaeological artefacts to museums. Far too many of them have decided they can no longer afford to keep the artefacts and have just skipped them. We had a real fight with Newark museum at the time of its conversion to the National Civil War Centre to prevent them dumping large amounts of ceramics and other artefacts dating back to the Roman period.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
But why would a museum chuck excess artefacts in the bin, as Richard alleges?
Insane. There must be hundreds of kids - in any sizeable town - with a passion for history who would be delighted, enlightened and energised by the outright gift of some Roman pottery shards or medieval glassware and so on. Give these things away.
I've got a collection of two dozen tiny little historic objects in my living room. I found them all myself which adds to their lustre, but I would love them anyway - a flint arrowhead from Gobekli Tepe, a bit of amphora handle from the Valley of the Shadow of Death, some shrapnel from Gallipoli, a Piece of Pol Pot's Patio.
I love these things. Historical objects are history you can touch. Priceless. Never bin them!
I lusted after a Gobekli Tepe arrowhead (there's no shortage of them) but didn't have the bottle to try to smuggle one out - my Turkish phrase book usefully gives the translation for "I am terribly sorry Mr Customs Officer, I had no idea about the savage penalties for unlicensed antiquity exports," and I have watched Midnight Express.
I remember when I found my Gobekli Tepe arrowhead I was almost overcome with excitement. I pocketed it eagerly (and clandestinely). Then I had a big spasm of guilt and looked around, with a mind to putting it back - then I realised I was standing on a hill of flints which was practically all arrowheads and axes. Thousands of them
So I kept it and took it home. And I can see it now as I type. An arrowhead knapped by the same hunter-gatherers who built the world's oldest structure, a veritable temple in Eden, maybe 12,000 years ago.
Marvellous
Arrowheads form a nice thematic thread though this topic, since, according to Herodotus, the Scythian king Ariantas had each of his nomadic subjects contribute an arrowhead to his census - on pain on death - as a simple means of estimating their population. Once these arrowheads were all collected, they were used to manufacture a giant bronze vessel of over 5000 gallons in volume to serve as a monument to his rule. And indeed that's the only reason anyone has ever heard of him...
And our entire nation would be very different if it weren't for the arrow in Harold's eye
The Anglo-Saxons came quite close to winning at Hastings, DESPITE the handicap of having fought and won a brutal battle against the Norse, and King Harald Hardrada, a few days before. Like beating the Springboks then taking on the All Blacks, later that same weekend
If he'd won the 2nd battle, like the first, Harold Godwinsson would now be the greatest hero in English history, instead of a footnote, and an image on a tapestry. Discuss.
And the world would also be very different, shaped by a different Britain - or not shaped at all.
I'm glad they won tbh. If you look at the words they brought in that the Saxons did not have - 'chair', 'curtain' - it was a tough old life before.
That poll makes sense. A solid 35-40% of Scots are firmly YES/indy. Accords with all we know. There's a large soft middle, 20-30% of the country, who could be persuaded either way. 35-40% are hard NO.
Very close. On the upside, for the Nats, they just have to win over 10% of the country and they could win a Sindyref. On the downside, they don't have to lose many soft votes = they fail to get a majority. Momentum is lost. Sturgeon is in question. More scandals emerge.
This is a critical election for the SNP. If they win it, but don't win it by enough, they could fall apart, at speed
Democracy, SNP version:
“ So let’s have some specifics, four local candidates were interested in the seat. Only one was interviewed, the other three were not even given the courtesy of an interview. The “lucky” local candidate who was granted an interview was advised of this at 10.30 pm on Saturday 6th March and given a time of 2.15 pm on the Sunday 7th March. Needless to say they did not pass, nobody conveyed this to the Constituency Convener and he had to find out from others. HQ did announce at 15.30 pm on the 9th March the two favoured names, the only names, that would be on the ballot paper. The ballot papers were issued at 17.30 the same day.
The two favoured candidates are a Tracy Carragher who was involved in the branch in Coatbridge that was suspended. She is thought to have been involved in that bust up. She works in the office of another SNP MSP. The other approved candidate is Anun Qaiser- Javeed. She is reported to be a close friend of the Justice Minister. The constituency were not offered the possibility of a Zoom hustings. The members know nothing about either candidate other than one side of an A4 sheet that was circulated with the ballot information.”
To me the SNP feels like (forgive the hyperbole) a totalitarian regime in Eastern Europe in about 1988. Seemingly impregnable, will go on and on, normalcy bias says that nothing will change because it hasn't changed in ages
But once the Berlin Wall starts crumbling..... who knows.
Same as happened to Scottish Labour, of course. From total hegemony to near irrelevancy, in 2 or 3 elections. I don't think the SNP will fall that far, the indy cause puts a floor under their support. But I can foresee intense factionalism dividing them for a decade, if they can't get a new referendum or Sturgeon is seen to quail
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
It is one reason why I would urge people these days to think very carefully before donating archaeological artefacts to museums. Far too many of them have decided they can no longer afford to keep the artefacts and have just skipped them. We had a real fight with Newark museum at the time of its conversion to the National Civil War Centre to prevent them dumping large amounts of ceramics and other artefacts dating back to the Roman period.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
But why would a museum chuck excess artefacts in the bin, as Richard alleges?
Insane. There must be hundreds of kids - in any sizeable town - with a passion for history who would be delighted, enlightened and energised by the outright gift of some Roman pottery shards or medieval glassware and so on. Give these things away.
I've got a collection of two dozen tiny little historic objects in my living room. I found them all myself which adds to their lustre, but I would love them anyway - a flint arrowhead from Gobekli Tepe, a bit of amphora handle from the Valley of the Shadow of Death, some shrapnel from Gallipoli, a Piece of Pol Pot's Patio.
I love these things. Historical objects are history you can touch. Priceless. Never bin them!
I lusted after a Gobekli Tepe arrowhead (there's no shortage of them) but didn't have the bottle to try to smuggle one out - my Turkish phrase book usefully gives the translation for "I am terribly sorry Mr Customs Officer, I had no idea about the savage penalties for unlicensed antiquity exports," and I have watched Midnight Express.
I remember when I found my Gobekli Tepe arrowhead I was almost overcome with excitement. I pocketed it eagerly (and clandestinely). Then I had a big spasm of guilt and looked around, with a mind to putting it back - then I realised I was standing on a hill of flints which was practically all arrowheads and axes. Thousands of them
So I kept it and took it home. And I can see it now as I type. An arrowhead knapped by the same hunter-gatherers who built the world's oldest structure, a veritable temple in Eden, maybe 12,000 years ago.
Marvellous
Arrowheads form a nice thematic thread though this topic, since, according to Herodotus, the Scythian king Ariantas had each of his nomadic subjects contribute an arrowhead to his census - on pain on death - as a simple means of estimating their population. Once these arrowheads were all collected, they were used to manufacture a giant bronze vessel of over 5000 gallons in volume to serve as a monument to his rule. And indeed that's the only reason anyone has ever heard of him...
And our entire nation would be very different if it weren't for the arrow in Harold's eye
The Anglo-Saxons came quite close to winning at Hastings, DESPITE the handicap of having fought and won a brutal battle against the Norse, and King Harald Hardrada, a few days before. Like beating the Springboks then taking on the All Blacks, later that same weekend
If he'd won the 2nd battle, like the first, Harold Godwinsson would now be the greatest hero in English history, instead of a footnote, and an image on a tapestry. Discuss.
And the world would also be very different, shaped by a different Britain - or not shaped at all.
English victory at Hastings is an alternative history favourite, though frankly it's so far back in time and would represent such a significant deviation from established events that its long-term effects can only be vaguely guessed at.
Most of us posting on here (and certainly all those of largely British descent) will have ancestors who fought at the battle of Hastings, even though we don't know their names.
Etymologically speaking, is there a relation between the proper nouns "Kent" and "Cnut"?
Thus, does Men of Kent = Men of Cnut? While Kentish Men = Cnutish Men?
No. “Kent” is actually one of the oldest surviving place names in England. It derives from theCeltic tribe who inhabited South East England from the Thames to the south coast. The Roman's called the people the Cantii or Cantiaci and the county Cantium. “Canterbury” comes from the Roman “Durovernum Cantiacorum” then, when Jutish influence became prevalent, it became known in Old English as Cantwareburh “stronghold of the Kentish men".
The Men of Kent/Kentish Men thing has a number of theories but may have had something to do with differing feudal systems either side of the River Medway.
Knut is a norse name, originally a nickname meaning "knot", not sure why. It is etymologically linked to the Russian кнут, knout, knotted whip.
And who is to say the Normans wouldn't have been back another year. They weren't know for just sitting around and enjoying what they had already.
True, but if the English had won at Hastings, William would likely have been killed (and his claim would've effectively died with him - besides anything else he was effectively undertaking a crusade against an alleged oath breaker, but if Harold had won he would've been exonerated as it was generally accepted at the time that God decided the outcome of battles.)
A repeat invasion then seems unlikely - England was much larger and richer than Normandy, and Harold may well only have lost in the first place because of the bad luck of having to repel two major assaults in succession. Beyond that, in the actual timeline the only foreign invasions to have happened since 1066 - by the French dauphin in 1216 and by William of Orange in 1688 - were both by invitation of powerful elements within England.
If 1066 had failed then it seems highly likely that there would never have been a Norman Conquest, and it's much less likely that the English crown would subsequently have accrued continental possessions. The implications for our language, culture and wider Western European history would've been profound.
A more interesting point to me is about the Horizon programme. If it funded research that led to four out of the six main vaccines, and the companies concerned do appear to credit the programme, that's a huge success and one we don't really hear about. I am not talking about EU good/bad/whatever. The programme itself really seems to have delivered !
Evidence for that assertion please.
I suspect (and it's just a suspicion) that almost every vaccine programme will have taken money at some point from the Wellcome Trust, Horizon, regional development agencies, the UK government, and various others. That's the nature of something that was - until recently - pretty unfashionable, and where researchers will have spent their time grubbing for grants.
But having taken (at some point, and for some portion of related research) money from Horizon is very far from Horizon having been the - or even a - major funder.
Agree that funding is a hand-to-mouth exercise for all research institutes. Having looked into this a bit, Horizon is given major credit for funding primary research at the relevant institutes in these links for Jenner Institute, Bio-N-Tech and Janssen Laboratories/J&J, although the latter also got a lot of funding from the US government. Curevac got its original funding from the EU, but most of its primary research in recent years seems to have been funded by Bill Gates. It did get development funding from Horizon however.
Should add the important point that it is entirely because these labs did the unfashionable research for years that they were able to step in to get the vaccines developed in record time.
Investigating further, I think @rcs1000 hit the nail on the head with his comment about unfashionable research. The Covid vaccines come out of research into vaccines for diseases that affect poor countries, in particular ebola, where there is a high failure rate in the development of those vaccines. Funding requires bodies with deep pockets who don't care about commercial return. There seem to be three such bodies: EU Horizon, the US Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. We can be grateful to Bill Gates in particular, who funded research at Curevac over many years and kept Novavax going through a succession of failed vaccines.
The geographic distribution of the laboratories presumably reflects the availability of funding. The Novavax research originated in a Swedish laboratory that was taken over by Novavax, so arguably a fifth European lab.
Also a callout for the Gamaleya Research Institute who seem to have produced a good Sputnik V vaccine based on their research into MERS and ebola with rather little support. They are badly served by their government, but hopefully will get the recognition in the West that they deserve.
Some of the foundational work for the mRNA vaccines was funded by DARPA during the Obama administration.
Didn't the Scottish nurse have a relapse, with the thinking that the virus sometimes does not clear certain tissues, such as the vitreous humour (and the testes in men)
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
It is one reason why I would urge people these days to think very carefully before donating archaeological artefacts to museums. Far too many of them have decided they can no longer afford to keep the artefacts and have just skipped them. We had a real fight with Newark museum at the time of its conversion to the National Civil War Centre to prevent them dumping large amounts of ceramics and other artefacts dating back to the Roman period.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
But why would a museum chuck excess artefacts in the bin, as Richard alleges?
Insane. There must be hundreds of kids - in any sizeable town - with a passion for history who would be delighted, enlightened and energised by the outright gift of some Roman pottery shards or medieval glassware and so on. Give these things away.
I've got a collection of two dozen tiny little historic objects in my living room. I found them all myself which adds to their lustre, but I would love them anyway - a flint arrowhead from Gobekli Tepe, a bit of amphora handle from the Valley of the Shadow of Death, some shrapnel from Gallipoli, a Piece of Pol Pot's Patio.
I love these things. Historical objects are history you can touch. Priceless. Never bin them!
I lusted after a Gobekli Tepe arrowhead (there's no shortage of them) but didn't have the bottle to try to smuggle one out - my Turkish phrase book usefully gives the translation for "I am terribly sorry Mr Customs Officer, I had no idea about the savage penalties for unlicensed antiquity exports," and I have watched Midnight Express.
I remember when I found my Gobekli Tepe arrowhead I was almost overcome with excitement. I pocketed it eagerly (and clandestinely). Then I had a big spasm of guilt and looked around, with a mind to putting it back - then I realised I was standing on a hill of flints which was practically all arrowheads and axes. Thousands of them
So I kept it and took it home. And I can see it now as I type. An arrowhead knapped by the same hunter-gatherers who built the world's oldest structure, a veritable temple in Eden, maybe 12,000 years ago.
Marvellous
Arrowheads form a nice thematic thread though this topic, since, according to Herodotus, the Scythian king Ariantas had each of his nomadic subjects contribute an arrowhead to his census - on pain on death - as a simple means of estimating their population. Once these arrowheads were all collected, they were used to manufacture a giant bronze vessel of over 5000 gallons in volume to serve as a monument to his rule. And indeed that's the only reason anyone has ever heard of him...
And our entire nation would be very different if it weren't for the arrow in Harold's eye
The Anglo-Saxons came quite close to winning at Hastings, DESPITE the handicap of having fought and won a brutal battle against the Norse, and King Harald Hardrada, a few days before. Like beating the Springboks then taking on the All Blacks, later that same weekend
If he'd won the 2nd battle, like the first, Harold Godwinsson would now be the greatest hero in English history, instead of a footnote, and an image on a tapestry. Discuss.
And the world would also be very different, shaped by a different Britain - or not shaped at all.
English victory at Hastings is an alternative history favourite, though frankly it's so far back in time and would represent such a significant deviation from established events that its long-term effects can only be vaguely guessed at.
Most of us posting on here (and certainly all those of largely British descent) will have ancestors who fought at the battle of Hastings, even though we don't know their names.
I find that a remarkable thought.
I have a direct and provable descent from William himself, the Bastard
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
Your low opinion of university libraries is correct. Once at the University of REDACTED, I attended a sale of surplus items. "A librarian's life is a constant battle against space", I was told.
There was amongst the discarded debris a first edition of Jane Austen's Sense and Sensibility
Being honest, I remonstrated that this book should be retained in the collection, which it was.
Well, until the next lunatick decides the library is short of space and needs to get rid of surplus stock that students don't need.
On a similar vein, a few years ago I was doing research for a book on the British Interventions in Southern Russia in 1918 at the Brotherton Library in Leeds. I was going through accounts and diaries from WW1 veterans and found a box of a young officer in the Machine Gun Corps who travelled all the way to Baku on the Caspian and won the Military Cross on his first night there.
As I went through the box I found, tucked away in the bottom, the very medal he had won. Knowing they are of some value I took it to the desk but the lady there seemed surprised that it was of any value. To be honest anyone could have walked away with it. I had a chat with the librarians and they said they would do a search of the other boxes to make sure there were no further valuables tucked away.
I see your Baku and raise you a Stalingrad (of sorts!).
British tank crews were involved in the successful capture of Tsaritsyn in 1919 alongside the White Russians under General Denikin. However, the Red Army re-took it within 6 months. Tsaritsyn later became much more famous as Stalingrad of WW2 fame, though it was renamed Volgograd in the 1950s.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
It is one reason why I would urge people these days to think very carefully before donating archaeological artefacts to museums. Far too many of them have decided they can no longer afford to keep the artefacts and have just skipped them. We had a real fight with Newark museum at the time of its conversion to the National Civil War Centre to prevent them dumping large amounts of ceramics and other artefacts dating back to the Roman period.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
But why would a museum chuck excess artefacts in the bin, as Richard alleges?
Insane. There must be hundreds of kids - in any sizeable town - with a passion for history who would be delighted, enlightened and energised by the outright gift of some Roman pottery shards or medieval glassware and so on. Give these things away.
I've got a collection of two dozen tiny little historic objects in my living room. I found them all myself which adds to their lustre, but I would love them anyway - a flint arrowhead from Gobekli Tepe, a bit of amphora handle from the Valley of the Shadow of Death, some shrapnel from Gallipoli, a Piece of Pol Pot's Patio.
I love these things. Historical objects are history you can touch. Priceless. Never bin them!
I lusted after a Gobekli Tepe arrowhead (there's no shortage of them) but didn't have the bottle to try to smuggle one out - my Turkish phrase book usefully gives the translation for "I am terribly sorry Mr Customs Officer, I had no idea about the savage penalties for unlicensed antiquity exports," and I have watched Midnight Express.
I remember when I found my Gobekli Tepe arrowhead I was almost overcome with excitement. I pocketed it eagerly (and clandestinely). Then I had a big spasm of guilt and looked around, with a mind to putting it back - then I realised I was standing on a hill of flints which was practically all arrowheads and axes. Thousands of them
So I kept it and took it home. And I can see it now as I type. An arrowhead knapped by the same hunter-gatherers who built the world's oldest structure, a veritable temple in Eden, maybe 12,000 years ago.
Marvellous
Arrowheads form a nice thematic thread though this topic, since, according to Herodotus, the Scythian king Ariantas had each of his nomadic subjects contribute an arrowhead to his census - on pain on death - as a simple means of estimating their population. Once these arrowheads were all collected, they were used to manufacture a giant bronze vessel of over 5000 gallons in volume to serve as a monument to his rule. And indeed that's the only reason anyone has ever heard of him...
And our entire nation would be very different if it weren't for the arrow in Harold's eye
The Anglo-Saxons came quite close to winning at Hastings, DESPITE the handicap of having fought and won a brutal battle against the Norse, and King Harald Hardrada, a few days before. Like beating the Springboks then taking on the All Blacks, later that same weekend
If he'd won the 2nd battle, like the first, Harold Godwinsson would now be the greatest hero in English history, instead of a footnote, and an image on a tapestry. Discuss.
And the world would also be very different, shaped by a different Britain - or not shaped at all.
English victory at Hastings is an alternative history favourite, though frankly it's so far back in time and would represent such a significant deviation from established events that its long-term effects can only be vaguely guessed at.
And who is to say the Normans wouldn't have been back another year. They weren't know for just sitting around and enjoying what they had already.
But the Normans would probably have turned west and south rather than north. Invading and conquering England is very hard. Note that no one has succeeded since. The Spanish vowed to try a 2nd time after the failure of the armada, but, in the end, they didn't. Nerves failed.
The Normans, after a failure in England, would have had a go at Brittany, or gone down the French coast to Aquitaine. Much easier.
And of course after winning at Hastings a triumphant and vindicated Harold Godwinsson would 1, have shored up his defences and 2, might have gone on the offensive himself, now rid of any Viking threat from the east
I agree.
But as it stands, 14th October 1066 remains the single day that shaped Britain more than any other.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
It is one reason why I would urge people these days to think very carefully before donating archaeological artefacts to museums. Far too many of them have decided they can no longer afford to keep the artefacts and have just skipped them. We had a real fight with Newark museum at the time of its conversion to the National Civil War Centre to prevent them dumping large amounts of ceramics and other artefacts dating back to the Roman period.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
But why would a museum chuck excess artefacts in the bin, as Richard alleges?
Insane. There must be hundreds of kids - in any sizeable town - with a passion for history who would be delighted, enlightened and energised by the outright gift of some Roman pottery shards or medieval glassware and so on. Give these things away.
I've got a collection of two dozen tiny little historic objects in my living room. I found them all myself which adds to their lustre, but I would love them anyway - a flint arrowhead from Gobekli Tepe, a bit of amphora handle from the Valley of the Shadow of Death, some shrapnel from Gallipoli, a Piece of Pol Pot's Patio.
I love these things. Historical objects are history you can touch. Priceless. Never bin them!
I lusted after a Gobekli Tepe arrowhead (there's no shortage of them) but didn't have the bottle to try to smuggle one out - my Turkish phrase book usefully gives the translation for "I am terribly sorry Mr Customs Officer, I had no idea about the savage penalties for unlicensed antiquity exports," and I have watched Midnight Express.
I remember when I found my Gobekli Tepe arrowhead I was almost overcome with excitement. I pocketed it eagerly (and clandestinely). Then I had a big spasm of guilt and looked around, with a mind to putting it back - then I realised I was standing on a hill of flints which was practically all arrowheads and axes. Thousands of them
So I kept it and took it home. And I can see it now as I type. An arrowhead knapped by the same hunter-gatherers who built the world's oldest structure, a veritable temple in Eden, maybe 12,000 years ago.
Marvellous
Arrowheads form a nice thematic thread though this topic, since, according to Herodotus, the Scythian king Ariantas had each of his nomadic subjects contribute an arrowhead to his census - on pain on death - as a simple means of estimating their population. Once these arrowheads were all collected, they were used to manufacture a giant bronze vessel of over 5000 gallons in volume to serve as a monument to his rule. And indeed that's the only reason anyone has ever heard of him...
And our entire nation would be very different if it weren't for the arrow in Harold's eye
The Anglo-Saxons came quite close to winning at Hastings, DESPITE the handicap of having fought and won a brutal battle against the Norse, and King Harald Hardrada, a few days before. Like beating the Springboks then taking on the All Blacks, later that same weekend
If he'd won the 2nd battle, like the first, Harold Godwinsson would now be the greatest hero in English history, instead of a footnote, and an image on a tapestry. Discuss.
And the world would also be very different, shaped by a different Britain - or not shaped at all.
The world probably wouldn't be that different actually, except for more people realising England dates back to 927 and not 1066.
Cultures weren't set in stone and fixed, indeed especially you're contrasting the conflict with the Norse, with the conflict with the victorious Normans - but two centuries earlier the Normans were themselves Norse Vikings.
Ultimately it was quite likely whoever in charge of England would evolve in a slightly different path to the rest of the continent.
That's a full spread! Easy on the curry Saturday night maybe..
We really are covering all the big ticket subjects tonight - who cares about Scottish Independence, Covid or Europe?
The key to a Chinese is not to overplay your hand on the evening - some things only work when you have them hot and fresh but others actually improve for an evening and a gentle reheating the next day. Are you going for the quick scoff or the longer game?
Now, the Saturday morning full English - not to be confused with the working day mad rush - this is more what I would call English Brunch - it's the breakfast but slower, later and accompanied by a decent newspaper (see above). It is one of the few aspects of life I've genuinely missed in lockdown.
The question now is whether it's worth the risk to have an alfresco full English in a pub garden next month - pub breakfasts can be extremely good (obviously Wetherspoons is for weekday consumption only).
Stodge indeed.
Until lockdown I found cooking a full English too much hassle, but recently I’ve become quite adept. But it’s still not the same. To venture out again with a decent book, and have one cooked for me, is one of the things I look forward to most.
There's a cafe near where I used to live that does an amazing posh double sausage and egg mcmuffin, I'm very much looking forwards to going there with a hangover and indulging in one and fancy Hampstead coffee.
Most of us posting on here (and certainly all those of largely British descent) will have ancestors who fought at the battle of Hastings, even though we don't know their names.
I find that a remarkable thought.
Quite possibly yes. A few people might even know about them. Certainly I seem to recall there being a story in the news a few years ago about two women who placed an "In Memoriam" notice in a newspaper, in tribute to an ancestor who died at the Battle of Maldon in 991. Whether they were able to trace the family tree quite back that far or were filling in some of the details with guesswork or imagination I don't know, but it's quite a romantic notion all the same.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
It is one reason why I would urge people these days to think very carefully before donating archaeological artefacts to museums. Far too many of them have decided they can no longer afford to keep the artefacts and have just skipped them. We had a real fight with Newark museum at the time of its conversion to the National Civil War Centre to prevent them dumping large amounts of ceramics and other artefacts dating back to the Roman period.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
But why would a museum chuck excess artefacts in the bin, as Richard alleges?
Insane. There must be hundreds of kids - in any sizeable town - with a passion for history who would be delighted, enlightened and energised by the outright gift of some Roman pottery shards or medieval glassware and so on. Give these things away.
I've got a collection of two dozen tiny little historic objects in my living room. I found them all myself which adds to their lustre, but I would love them anyway - a flint arrowhead from Gobekli Tepe, a bit of amphora handle from the Valley of the Shadow of Death, some shrapnel from Gallipoli, a Piece of Pol Pot's Patio.
I love these things. Historical objects are history you can touch. Priceless. Never bin them!
I lusted after a Gobekli Tepe arrowhead (there's no shortage of them) but didn't have the bottle to try to smuggle one out - my Turkish phrase book usefully gives the translation for "I am terribly sorry Mr Customs Officer, I had no idea about the savage penalties for unlicensed antiquity exports," and I have watched Midnight Express.
I remember when I found my Gobekli Tepe arrowhead I was almost overcome with excitement. I pocketed it eagerly (and clandestinely). Then I had a big spasm of guilt and looked around, with a mind to putting it back - then I realised I was standing on a hill of flints which was practically all arrowheads and axes. Thousands of them
So I kept it and took it home. And I can see it now as I type. An arrowhead knapped by the same hunter-gatherers who built the world's oldest structure, a veritable temple in Eden, maybe 12,000 years ago.
Marvellous
Arrowheads form a nice thematic thread though this topic, since, according to Herodotus, the Scythian king Ariantas had each of his nomadic subjects contribute an arrowhead to his census - on pain on death - as a simple means of estimating their population. Once these arrowheads were all collected, they were used to manufacture a giant bronze vessel of over 5000 gallons in volume to serve as a monument to his rule. And indeed that's the only reason anyone has ever heard of him...
And our entire nation would be very different if it weren't for the arrow in Harold's eye
The Anglo-Saxons came quite close to winning at Hastings, DESPITE the handicap of having fought and won a brutal battle against the Norse, and King Harald Hardrada, a few days before. Like beating the Springboks then taking on the All Blacks, later that same weekend
If he'd won the 2nd battle, like the first, Harold Godwinsson would now be the greatest hero in English history, instead of a footnote, and an image on a tapestry. Discuss.
And the world would also be very different, shaped by a different Britain - or not shaped at all.
English victory at Hastings is an alternative history favourite, though frankly it's so far back in time and would represent such a significant deviation from established events that its long-term effects can only be vaguely guessed at.
Most of us posting on here (and certainly all those of largely British descent) will have ancestors who fought at the battle of Hastings, even though we don't know their names.
I find that a remarkable thought.
All of us posting here will have ancestors who emigrated from Africa over the last 100,000 years, even though we don't know their names.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
It is one reason why I would urge people these days to think very carefully before donating archaeological artefacts to museums. Far too many of them have decided they can no longer afford to keep the artefacts and have just skipped them. We had a real fight with Newark museum at the time of its conversion to the National Civil War Centre to prevent them dumping large amounts of ceramics and other artefacts dating back to the Roman period.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
But why would a museum chuck excess artefacts in the bin, as Richard alleges?
Insane. There must be hundreds of kids - in any sizeable town - with a passion for history who would be delighted, enlightened and energised by the outright gift of some Roman pottery shards or medieval glassware and so on. Give these things away.
I've got a collection of two dozen tiny little historic objects in my living room. I found them all myself which adds to their lustre, but I would love them anyway - a flint arrowhead from Gobekli Tepe, a bit of amphora handle from the Valley of the Shadow of Death, some shrapnel from Gallipoli, a Piece of Pol Pot's Patio.
I love these things. Historical objects are history you can touch. Priceless. Never bin them!
I lusted after a Gobekli Tepe arrowhead (there's no shortage of them) but didn't have the bottle to try to smuggle one out - my Turkish phrase book usefully gives the translation for "I am terribly sorry Mr Customs Officer, I had no idea about the savage penalties for unlicensed antiquity exports," and I have watched Midnight Express.
I remember when I found my Gobekli Tepe arrowhead I was almost overcome with excitement. I pocketed it eagerly (and clandestinely). Then I had a big spasm of guilt and looked around, with a mind to putting it back - then I realised I was standing on a hill of flints which was practically all arrowheads and axes. Thousands of them
So I kept it and took it home. And I can see it now as I type. An arrowhead knapped by the same hunter-gatherers who built the world's oldest structure, a veritable temple in Eden, maybe 12,000 years ago.
Marvellous
Arrowheads form a nice thematic thread though this topic, since, according to Herodotus, the Scythian king Ariantas had each of his nomadic subjects contribute an arrowhead to his census - on pain on death - as a simple means of estimating their population. Once these arrowheads were all collected, they were used to manufacture a giant bronze vessel of over 5000 gallons in volume to serve as a monument to his rule. And indeed that's the only reason anyone has ever heard of him...
And our entire nation would be very different if it weren't for the arrow in Harold's eye
The Anglo-Saxons came quite close to winning at Hastings, DESPITE the handicap of having fought and won a brutal battle against the Norse, and King Harald Hardrada, a few days before. Like beating the Springboks then taking on the All Blacks, later that same weekend
If he'd won the 2nd battle, like the first, Harold Godwinsson would now be the greatest hero in English history, instead of a footnote, and an image on a tapestry. Discuss.
And the world would also be very different, shaped by a different Britain - or not shaped at all.
I'm glad they won tbh. If you look at the words they brought in that the Saxons did not have - 'chair', 'curtain' - it was a tough old life before.
How about "seats" and "blinds"?
Pretty sure if you'd asked for a 'blind', they'd have poked your eyes out for you with a hot stick.
Most of us posting on here (and certainly all those of largely British descent) will have ancestors who fought at the battle of Hastings, even though we don't know their names.
I find that a remarkable thought.
Quite possibly yes. A few people might even know about them. Certainly I seem to recall there being a story in the news a few years ago about two women who placed an "In Memoriam" notice in a newspaper, in tribute to an ancestor who died at the Battle of Maldon in 991. Whether they were able to trace the family tree quite back that far or were filling in some of the details with guesswork or imagination I don't know, but it's quite a romantic notion all the same.
I expect Charles has a few ancestors that fought at Hastings, and knows which local fyrd they commanded
So don't expect much (any) movement on the 21st June great opening up then. By then, anyone who wants will have had one jab, the vulnerable two - and be two-three weeks into their antibody build as a minimum.
It really is quite difficult to see how the Covid virus find enough UK residents to infect after that. R = very close to 0? In practice, that will kick in weeks earlier. But - safety first will be the Govt. touchstone.
R will not be close to zero. But it doesn't need to be. Anything below 1 will do. Take your guess at the unrestricted and unvaccinated R for the Kent variant and multiply with the percentage of people who either aren't getting vaccinated (children, medical reasons, refuseniks) or who can still pass on the virus despite being vaccinated. 4 and 25% would get to 1.0.
What is there to discuss, the fact he's even hearing the other side is nuts
I have to say I had always assumed we didn’t have this shit in this country, and that it would be de facto banned anyway. Is anyone in favour of it? Really? I suppose one can argue that if someone really wants it themselves because of their own beliefs, and there is no compulsion, they should be allowed.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
It is one reason why I would urge people these days to think very carefully before donating archaeological artefacts to museums. Far too many of them have decided they can no longer afford to keep the artefacts and have just skipped them. We had a real fight with Newark museum at the time of its conversion to the National Civil War Centre to prevent them dumping large amounts of ceramics and other artefacts dating back to the Roman period.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
But why would a museum chuck excess artefacts in the bin, as Richard alleges?
Insane. There must be hundreds of kids - in any sizeable town - with a passion for history who would be delighted, enlightened and energised by the outright gift of some Roman pottery shards or medieval glassware and so on. Give these things away.
I've got a collection of two dozen tiny little historic objects in my living room. I found them all myself which adds to their lustre, but I would love them anyway - a flint arrowhead from Gobekli Tepe, a bit of amphora handle from the Valley of the Shadow of Death, some shrapnel from Gallipoli, a Piece of Pol Pot's Patio.
I love these things. Historical objects are history you can touch. Priceless. Never bin them!
I lusted after a Gobekli Tepe arrowhead (there's no shortage of them) but didn't have the bottle to try to smuggle one out - my Turkish phrase book usefully gives the translation for "I am terribly sorry Mr Customs Officer, I had no idea about the savage penalties for unlicensed antiquity exports," and I have watched Midnight Express.
I remember when I found my Gobekli Tepe arrowhead I was almost overcome with excitement. I pocketed it eagerly (and clandestinely). Then I had a big spasm of guilt and looked around, with a mind to putting it back - then I realised I was standing on a hill of flints which was practically all arrowheads and axes. Thousands of them
So I kept it and took it home. And I can see it now as I type. An arrowhead knapped by the same hunter-gatherers who built the world's oldest structure, a veritable temple in Eden, maybe 12,000 years ago.
Marvellous
Arrowheads form a nice thematic thread though this topic, since, according to Herodotus, the Scythian king Ariantas had each of his nomadic subjects contribute an arrowhead to his census - on pain on death - as a simple means of estimating their population. Once these arrowheads were all collected, they were used to manufacture a giant bronze vessel of over 5000 gallons in volume to serve as a monument to his rule. And indeed that's the only reason anyone has ever heard of him...
And our entire nation would be very different if it weren't for the arrow in Harold's eye
The Anglo-Saxons came quite close to winning at Hastings, DESPITE the handicap of having fought and won a brutal battle against the Norse, and King Harald Hardrada, a few days before. Like beating the Springboks then taking on the All Blacks, later that same weekend
If he'd won the 2nd battle, like the first, Harold Godwinsson would now be the greatest hero in English history, instead of a footnote, and an image on a tapestry. Discuss.
And the world would also be very different, shaped by a different Britain - or not shaped at all.
English victory at Hastings is an alternative history favourite, though frankly it's so far back in time and would represent such a significant deviation from established events that its long-term effects can only be vaguely guessed at.
And who is to say the Normans wouldn't have been back another year. They weren't know for just sitting around and enjoying what they had already.
But the Normans would probably have turned west and south rather than north. Invading and conquering England is very hard. Note that no one has succeeded since. The Spanish vowed to try a 2nd time after the failure of the armada, but, in the end, they didn't. Nerves failed.
The Normans, after a failure in England, would have had a go at Brittany, or gone down the French coast to Aquitaine. Much easier.
And of course after winning at Hastings a triumphant and vindicated Harold Godwinsson would 1, have shored up his defences and 2, might have gone on the offensive himself, now rid of any Viking threat from the east
I agree.
But as it stands, 14th October 1066 remains the single day that shaped Britain more than any other.
John Stuart Mill famously disagreed: 'The battle of Marathon, even as an event in English history, is more important than the battle of Hastings...'
What is there to discuss, the fact he's even hearing the other side is nuts
I have to say I had always assumed we didn’t have this shit in this country, and that it would be de facto banned anyway. Is anyone in favour of it? Really? I suppose one can argue that if someone really wants it themselves because of their own beliefs, and there is no compulsion, they should be allowed.
If you can be, ah, "converted" from male to female, or female to male, in principle, why not gay to straight?
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
Your low opinion of university libraries is correct. Once at the University of REDACTED, I attended a sale of surplus items. "A librarian's life is a constant battle against space", I was told.
There was amongst the discarded debris a first edition of Jane Austen's Sense and Sensibility
Being honest, I remonstrated that this book should be retained in the collection, which it was.
Well, until the next lunatick decides the library is short of space and needs to get rid of surplus stock that students don't need.
On a similar vein, a few years ago I was doing research for a book on the British Interventions in Southern Russia in 1918 at the Brotherton Library in Leeds. I was going through accounts and diaries from WW1 veterans and found a box of a young officer in the Machine Gun Corps who travelled all the way to Baku on the Caspian and won the Military Cross on his first night there.
As I went through the box I found, tucked away in the bottom, the very medal he had won. Knowing they are of some value I took it to the desk but the lady there seemed surprised that it was of any value. To be honest anyone could have walked away with it. I had a chat with the librarians and they said they would do a search of the other boxes to make sure there were no further valuables tucked away.
I see your Baku and raise you a Stalingrad (of sorts!).
British tank crews were involved in the successful capture of Tsaritsyn in 1919 alongside the White Russians under General Denikin. However, the Red Army re-took it within 6 months. Tsaritsyn later became much more famous as Stalingrad of WW2 fame, though it was renamed Volgograd in the 1950s.
Although it still uses the name Город-герой Сталинград (Hero City Stalingrad) on 9 dates every year that are connected with the battle.
Most of us posting on here (and certainly all those of largely British descent) will have ancestors who fought at the battle of Hastings, even though we don't know their names.
I find that a remarkable thought.
Quite possibly yes. A few people might even know about them. Certainly I seem to recall there being a story in the news a few years ago about two women who placed an "In Memoriam" notice in a newspaper, in tribute to an ancestor who died at the Battle of Maldon in 991. Whether they were able to trace the family tree quite back that far or were filling in some of the details with guesswork or imagination I don't know, but it's quite a romantic notion all the same.
I expect Charles has a few ancestors that fought at Hastings, and knows which local fyrd they commanded
Oh no sir. Our Charles comes from good Norman stock. Part of the ruling elite.
A more interesting point to me is about the Horizon programme. If it funded research that led to four out of the six main vaccines, and the companies concerned do appear to credit the programme, that's a huge success and one we don't really hear about. I am not talking about EU good/bad/whatever. The programme itself really seems to have delivered !
Evidence for that assertion please.
I suspect (and it's just a suspicion) that almost every vaccine programme will have taken money at some point from the Wellcome Trust, Horizon, regional development agencies, the UK government, and various others. That's the nature of something that was - until recently - pretty unfashionable, and where researchers will have spent their time grubbing for grants.
But having taken (at some point, and for some portion of related research) money from Horizon is very far from Horizon having been the - or even a - major funder.
Agree that funding is a hand-to-mouth exercise for all research institutes. Having looked into this a bit, Horizon is given major credit for funding primary research at the relevant institutes in these links for Jenner Institute, Bio-N-Tech and Janssen Laboratories/J&J, although the latter also got a lot of funding from the US government. Curevac got its original funding from the EU, but most of its primary research in recent years seems to have been funded by Bill Gates. It did get development funding from Horizon however.
Should add the important point that it is entirely because these labs did the unfashionable research for years that they were able to step in to get the vaccines developed in record time.
Investigating further, I think @rcs1000 hit the nail on the head with his comment about unfashionable research. The Covid vaccines come out of research into vaccines for diseases that affect poor countries, in particular ebola, where there is a high failure rate in the development of those vaccines. Funding requires bodies with deep pockets who don't care about commercial return. There seem to be three such bodies: EU Horizon, the US Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. We can be grateful to Bill Gates in particular, who funded research at Curevac over many years and kept Novavax going through a succession of failed vaccines.
The geographic distribution of the laboratories presumably reflects the availability of funding. The Novavax research originated in a Swedish laboratory that was taken over by Novavax, so arguably a fifth European lab.
Also a callout for the Gamaleya Research Institute who seem to have produced a good Sputnik V vaccine based on their research into MERS and ebola with rather little support. They are badly served by their government, but hopefully will get the recognition in the West that they deserve.
Some of the foundational work for the mRNA vaccines was funded by DARPA during the Obama administration.
Didn't the Scottish nurse have a relapse, with the thinking that the virus sometimes does not clear certain tissues, such as the vitreous humour (and the testes in men)
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
It is one reason why I would urge people these days to think very carefully before donating archaeological artefacts to museums. Far too many of them have decided they can no longer afford to keep the artefacts and have just skipped them. We had a real fight with Newark museum at the time of its conversion to the National Civil War Centre to prevent them dumping large amounts of ceramics and other artefacts dating back to the Roman period.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
But why would a museum chuck excess artefacts in the bin, as Richard alleges?
Insane. There must be hundreds of kids - in any sizeable town - with a passion for history who would be delighted, enlightened and energised by the outright gift of some Roman pottery shards or medieval glassware and so on. Give these things away.
I've got a collection of two dozen tiny little historic objects in my living room. I found them all myself which adds to their lustre, but I would love them anyway - a flint arrowhead from Gobekli Tepe, a bit of amphora handle from the Valley of the Shadow of Death, some shrapnel from Gallipoli, a Piece of Pol Pot's Patio.
I love these things. Historical objects are history you can touch. Priceless. Never bin them!
I lusted after a Gobekli Tepe arrowhead (there's no shortage of them) but didn't have the bottle to try to smuggle one out - my Turkish phrase book usefully gives the translation for "I am terribly sorry Mr Customs Officer, I had no idea about the savage penalties for unlicensed antiquity exports," and I have watched Midnight Express.
I remember when I found my Gobekli Tepe arrowhead I was almost overcome with excitement. I pocketed it eagerly (and clandestinely). Then I had a big spasm of guilt and looked around, with a mind to putting it back - then I realised I was standing on a hill of flints which was practically all arrowheads and axes. Thousands of them
So I kept it and took it home. And I can see it now as I type. An arrowhead knapped by the same hunter-gatherers who built the world's oldest structure, a veritable temple in Eden, maybe 12,000 years ago.
Marvellous
Arrowheads form a nice thematic thread though this topic, since, according to Herodotus, the Scythian king Ariantas had each of his nomadic subjects contribute an arrowhead to his census - on pain on death - as a simple means of estimating their population. Once these arrowheads were all collected, they were used to manufacture a giant bronze vessel of over 5000 gallons in volume to serve as a monument to his rule. And indeed that's the only reason anyone has ever heard of him...
And our entire nation would be very different if it weren't for the arrow in Harold's eye
The Anglo-Saxons came quite close to winning at Hastings, DESPITE the handicap of having fought and won a brutal battle against the Norse, and King Harald Hardrada, a few days before. Like beating the Springboks then taking on the All Blacks, later that same weekend
If he'd won the 2nd battle, like the first, Harold Godwinsson would now be the greatest hero in English history, instead of a footnote, and an image on a tapestry. Discuss.
And the world would also be very different, shaped by a different Britain - or not shaped at all.
English victory at Hastings is an alternative history favourite, though frankly it's so far back in time and would represent such a significant deviation from established events that its long-term effects can only be vaguely guessed at.
Most of us posting on here (and certainly all those of largely British descent) will have ancestors who fought at the battle of Hastings, even though we don't know their names.
I find that a remarkable thought.
I have a direct and provable descent from William himself, the Bastard
I am descended from William too, though I can't show you the descent line. Adam Rutherford's excellent book 'A Brief History of Everyone Who Ever Lived' explains why.
And sorry to piss on your parade but, since it's estimated that 5% of children are not the biological offspring of their familial fathers, your descent line from William over say 40 generations will almost certainly not hold true.
But since we can be pretty certain William does have living descendants, we can rest assured we both are descended from him (as are all the others on here who are of largely British descent).
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
It is one reason why I would urge people these days to think very carefully before donating archaeological artefacts to museums. Far too many of them have decided they can no longer afford to keep the artefacts and have just skipped them. We had a real fight with Newark museum at the time of its conversion to the National Civil War Centre to prevent them dumping large amounts of ceramics and other artefacts dating back to the Roman period.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
But why would a museum chuck excess artefacts in the bin, as Richard alleges?
Insane. There must be hundreds of kids - in any sizeable town - with a passion for history who would be delighted, enlightened and energised by the outright gift of some Roman pottery shards or medieval glassware and so on. Give these things away.
I've got a collection of two dozen tiny little historic objects in my living room. I found them all myself which adds to their lustre, but I would love them anyway - a flint arrowhead from Gobekli Tepe, a bit of amphora handle from the Valley of the Shadow of Death, some shrapnel from Gallipoli, a Piece of Pol Pot's Patio.
I love these things. Historical objects are history you can touch. Priceless. Never bin them!
I lusted after a Gobekli Tepe arrowhead (there's no shortage of them) but didn't have the bottle to try to smuggle one out - my Turkish phrase book usefully gives the translation for "I am terribly sorry Mr Customs Officer, I had no idea about the savage penalties for unlicensed antiquity exports," and I have watched Midnight Express.
I remember when I found my Gobekli Tepe arrowhead I was almost overcome with excitement. I pocketed it eagerly (and clandestinely). Then I had a big spasm of guilt and looked around, with a mind to putting it back - then I realised I was standing on a hill of flints which was practically all arrowheads and axes. Thousands of them
So I kept it and took it home. And I can see it now as I type. An arrowhead knapped by the same hunter-gatherers who built the world's oldest structure, a veritable temple in Eden, maybe 12,000 years ago.
Marvellous
Arrowheads form a nice thematic thread though this topic, since, according to Herodotus, the Scythian king Ariantas had each of his nomadic subjects contribute an arrowhead to his census - on pain on death - as a simple means of estimating their population. Once these arrowheads were all collected, they were used to manufacture a giant bronze vessel of over 5000 gallons in volume to serve as a monument to his rule. And indeed that's the only reason anyone has ever heard of him...
And our entire nation would be very different if it weren't for the arrow in Harold's eye
The Anglo-Saxons came quite close to winning at Hastings, DESPITE the handicap of having fought and won a brutal battle against the Norse, and King Harald Hardrada, a few days before. Like beating the Springboks then taking on the All Blacks, later that same weekend
If he'd won the 2nd battle, like the first, Harold Godwinsson would now be the greatest hero in English history, instead of a footnote, and an image on a tapestry. Discuss.
And the world would also be very different, shaped by a different Britain - or not shaped at all.
English victory at Hastings is an alternative history favourite, though frankly it's so far back in time and would represent such a significant deviation from established events that its long-term effects can only be vaguely guessed at.
And who is to say the Normans wouldn't have been back another year. They weren't know for just sitting around and enjoying what they had already.
But the Normans would probably have turned west and south rather than north. Invading and conquering England is very hard. Note that no one has succeeded since. The Spanish vowed to try a 2nd time after the failure of the armada, but, in the end, they didn't. Nerves failed.
The Normans, after a failure in England, would have had a go at Brittany, or gone down the French coast to Aquitaine. Much easier.
And of course after winning at Hastings a triumphant and vindicated Harold Godwinsson would 1, have shored up his defences and 2, might have gone on the offensive himself, now rid of any Viking threat from the east
I agree.
But as it stands, 14th October 1066 remains the single day that shaped Britain more than any other.
John Stuart Mill famously disagreed: 'The battle of Marathon, even as an event in English history, is more important than the battle of Hastings...'
Good job it was a long time ago. The battle of Snickers just doesn't have the same ring to it.
Seriously though, I'd like to hear Mill's reasoning. It seems rather implausible to me.
What is there to discuss, the fact he's even hearing the other side is nuts
I have to say I had always assumed we didn’t have this shit in this country, and that it would be de facto banned anyway. Is anyone in favour of it? Really? I suppose one can argue that if someone really wants it themselves because of their own beliefs, and there is no compulsion, they should be allowed.
If you can be, ah, "converted" from male to female, or female to male, in principle, why not gay to straight?
Sexuality and gender dysphoria are clean different issues. Indeed, that's part of what makes the whole transgender business so very complicated.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
It is one reason why I would urge people these days to think very carefully before donating archaeological artefacts to museums. Far too many of them have decided they can no longer afford to keep the artefacts and have just skipped them. We had a real fight with Newark museum at the time of its conversion to the National Civil War Centre to prevent them dumping large amounts of ceramics and other artefacts dating back to the Roman period.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
But why would a museum chuck excess artefacts in the bin, as Richard alleges?
Insane. There must be hundreds of kids - in any sizeable town - with a passion for history who would be delighted, enlightened and energised by the outright gift of some Roman pottery shards or medieval glassware and so on. Give these things away.
I've got a collection of two dozen tiny little historic objects in my living room. I found them all myself which adds to their lustre, but I would love them anyway - a flint arrowhead from Gobekli Tepe, a bit of amphora handle from the Valley of the Shadow of Death, some shrapnel from Gallipoli, a Piece of Pol Pot's Patio.
I love these things. Historical objects are history you can touch. Priceless. Never bin them!
I lusted after a Gobekli Tepe arrowhead (there's no shortage of them) but didn't have the bottle to try to smuggle one out - my Turkish phrase book usefully gives the translation for "I am terribly sorry Mr Customs Officer, I had no idea about the savage penalties for unlicensed antiquity exports," and I have watched Midnight Express.
I remember when I found my Gobekli Tepe arrowhead I was almost overcome with excitement. I pocketed it eagerly (and clandestinely). Then I had a big spasm of guilt and looked around, with a mind to putting it back - then I realised I was standing on a hill of flints which was practically all arrowheads and axes. Thousands of them
So I kept it and took it home. And I can see it now as I type. An arrowhead knapped by the same hunter-gatherers who built the world's oldest structure, a veritable temple in Eden, maybe 12,000 years ago.
Marvellous
Arrowheads form a nice thematic thread though this topic, since, according to Herodotus, the Scythian king Ariantas had each of his nomadic subjects contribute an arrowhead to his census - on pain on death - as a simple means of estimating their population. Once these arrowheads were all collected, they were used to manufacture a giant bronze vessel of over 5000 gallons in volume to serve as a monument to his rule. And indeed that's the only reason anyone has ever heard of him...
And our entire nation would be very different if it weren't for the arrow in Harold's eye
The Anglo-Saxons came quite close to winning at Hastings, DESPITE the handicap of having fought and won a brutal battle against the Norse, and King Harald Hardrada, a few days before. Like beating the Springboks then taking on the All Blacks, later that same weekend
If he'd won the 2nd battle, like the first, Harold Godwinsson would now be the greatest hero in English history, instead of a footnote, and an image on a tapestry. Discuss.
And the world would also be very different, shaped by a different Britain - or not shaped at all.
English victory at Hastings is an alternative history favourite, though frankly it's so far back in time and would represent such a significant deviation from established events that its long-term effects can only be vaguely guessed at.
Most of us posting on here (and certainly all those of largely British descent) will have ancestors who fought at the battle of Hastings, even though we don't know their names.
I find that a remarkable thought.
All of us posting here will have ancestors who emigrated from Africa over the last 100,000 years, even though we don't know their names.
Of course. I can't lay my hands on Rutherford's book right now but I seem remember that shared ancestors from a few thousand years ago are much more common than people expect.
Comments
In 2011 they wanted us to send Welsh questionnaires to more than just Wales. I can't remember the precise details, but I think they wanted a Welsh form to go to every Welsh postcode - some of which go into England.
Very close. On the upside, for the Nats, they just have to win over 10% of the country and they could win a Sindyref. On the downside, they don't have to lose many soft votes = they fail to get a majority. Momentum is lost. Sturgeon is in question. More scandals emerge.
This is a critical election for the SNP. If they win it, but don't win it by enough, they could fall apart, at speed
They should listen to their wiser elders.
I remember with affection the Sporting Life which was my daily read (about all I had in common with Lester Piggott) and was really sad when it ceased and the RP took over.
Nonetheless, it was for a long period a decent read - Alan Byrne and Chris Smith were decent editors and there were plenty of ex-Life writers such as Alastair Down. Once I got used to the form layout - the Life did it so well - it was perfectly useable.
I think the rot set in with Bruce Millington - I don't quite know why. Part of it is the truth that betting is now so much more than horses and dogs so other sports have to be covered and to be fair the Post has some real experts (Steve Palmer on the golf is superb) but it's become a sports betting paper rather than the specialist horse racing paper it was.
That's a full spread! Easy on the curry Saturday night maybe..
It actually looks like there's marginally more refusing in the 30 to 49s, due to the "have been offered but refused" element which is even worse.
But overall its a great result. If there were ever a political poll with that much blue and that little red I'd be made up. 😉
Not so much now.
Still, it continues to annoy the French that they can't win their own race.
It isn't as if drugs aren't rife in other sports. Rugby seems to be a particular hotspot.
The key to a Chinese is not to overplay your hand on the evening - some things only work when you have them hot and fresh but others actually improve for an evening and a gentle reheating the next day. Are you going for the quick scoff or the longer game?
Now, the Saturday morning full English - not to be confused with the working day mad rush - this is more what I would call English Brunch - it's the breakfast but slower, later and accompanied by a decent newspaper (see above). It is one of the few aspects of life I've genuinely missed in lockdown.
The question now is whether it's worth the risk to have an alfresco full English in a pub garden next month - pub breakfasts can be extremely good (obviously Wetherspoons is for weekday consumption only).
Thus, does Men of Kent = Men of Cnut? While Kentish Men = Cnutish Men?
It really is quite difficult to see how the Covid virus find enough UK residents to infect after that. R = very close to 0? In practice, that will kick in weeks earlier. But - safety first will be the Govt. touchstone.
THEN how come there is no English locality called Nosex? (Too obvious?)
The name Kent is believed to be of British Celtic origin. The meaning has been explained as 'coastal district,' 'corner-land' or 'land on the edge' (compare Welsh cant 'bordering of a circle, tire, edge,' Breton cant 'circle'). In Latin sources the area is called Cantia or Canticum, while the Anglo-Saxons referred to it as Cent, Cent lond or Centrice.[4][5]
The Anglo-Saxons came quite close to winning at Hastings, DESPITE the handicap of having fought and won a brutal battle against the Norse, and King Harald Hardrada, a few days before. Like beating the Springboks then taking on the All Blacks, later that same weekend
If he'd won the 2nd battle, like the first, Harold Godwinsson would now be the greatest hero in English history, instead of a footnote, and an image on a tapestry. Discuss.
And the world would also be very different, shaped by a different Britain - or not shaped at all.
https://www.kfhs.org.uk/kent-history
On the Ebola front, there’s some very recent, troubling news.
https://twitter.com/kakape/status/1370443414119022596
But sticking to late May for opening indoor hospitality is bloody crazy and a real wasted spring. That really should be escalated post Easter.
If someone experiences same sex attraction, but for whatever reason doesn't want it (maybe they want both a partner and a biological child with them), why shouldn't they seek therapy to change? I've no idea if such therapy can ever be successful, but I very much doubt there is any objective data either way. If someone wants to give it a try, what exactly is the harm? If it works, great, they get what they wanted. If it doesn't, well they shouldn't be any worse off. If we are going to ban stuff for being utterly ineffective, maybe start with homeopathy.
This isn't the same as saying its OK to pile pressure to try therapy on those who don't want to change, but that's a different issue entirely.
Good night.
“ So let’s have some specifics, four local candidates were interested in the seat. Only one was interviewed, the other three were not even given the courtesy of an interview. The “lucky” local candidate who was granted an interview was advised of this at 10.30 pm on Saturday 6th March and given a time of 2.15 pm on the Sunday 7th March. Needless to say they did not pass, nobody conveyed this to the Constituency Convener and he had to find out from others. HQ did announce at 15.30 pm on the 9th March the two favoured names, the only names, that would be on the ballot paper. The ballot papers were issued at 17.30 the same day.
The two favoured candidates are a Tracy Carragher who was involved in the branch in Coatbridge that was suspended. She is thought to have been involved in that bust up. She works in the office of another SNP MSP. The other approved candidate is Anun Qaiser- Javeed. She is reported to be a close friend of the Justice Minister. The constituency were not offered the possibility of a Zoom hustings. The members know nothing about either candidate other than one side of an A4 sheet that was circulated with the ballot information.”
https://yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com/2021/03/12/this-is-shameful/
As I went through the box I found, tucked away in the bottom, the very medal he had won. Knowing they are of some value I took it to the desk but the lady there seemed surprised that it was of any value. To be honest anyone could have walked away with it. I had a chat with the librarians and they said they would do a search of the other boxes to make sure there were no further valuables tucked away.
The Men of Kent/Kentish Men thing has a number of theories but may have had something to do with differing feudal systems either side of the River Medway.
Cricket, until T20, I don't think a huge amount to be gained from being on PEDs...but now it is similar to homerun hitters in baseball, big bucks if you can regularly muscle the ball over the boundary.
https://twitter.com/connorfletcher/status/1369427758833668098
The Normans, after a failure in England, would have had a go at Brittany, or gone down the French coast to Aquitaine. Much easier.
And of course after winning at Hastings a triumphant and vindicated Harold Godwinsson would 1, have shored up his defences and 2, might have gone on the offensive himself, now rid of any Viking threat from the east
Checked out of a hotel (Aberdeen)
A taxi (Aberdeen city to airport)
An airliner (Aberdeen to Southend)
A main line train (Southend to Shenfield, Shenfield to Romford)
A bus (Romford to Ilford (North)).
Though since Lockdown started, I have twice been on the Tube (short journeys round the lightly used Hainault Loop on the Central line), in September and December.
Until lockdown I found cooking a full English too much hassle, but recently I’ve become quite adept. But it’s still not the same.
To venture out again with a decent book, and have one cooked for me, is one of the things I look forward to most.
To me the SNP feels like (forgive the hyperbole) a totalitarian regime in Eastern Europe in about 1988. Seemingly impregnable, will go on and on, normalcy bias says that nothing will change because it hasn't changed in ages
But once the Berlin Wall starts crumbling..... who knows.
Same as happened to Scottish Labour, of course. From total hegemony to near irrelevancy, in 2 or 3 elections. I don't think the SNP will fall that far, the indy cause puts a floor under their support. But I can foresee intense factionalism dividing them for a decade, if they can't get a new referendum or Sturgeon is seen to quail
I find that a remarkable thought.
A repeat invasion then seems unlikely - England was much larger and richer than Normandy, and Harold may well only have lost in the first place because of the bad luck of having to repel two major assaults in succession. Beyond that, in the actual timeline the only foreign invasions to have happened since 1066 - by the French dauphin in 1216 and by William of Orange in 1688 - were both by invitation of powerful elements within England.
If 1066 had failed then it seems highly likely that there would never have been a Norman Conquest, and it's much less likely that the English crown would subsequently have accrued continental possessions. The implications for our language, culture and wider Western European history would've been profound.
https://www.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/news/20151112/uk-nurse-ebola-free
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323977109_Ebola_Virus_Persistence_in_Ocular_Tissues_and_Fluids_EVICT_Study_Reverse_Transcription-Polymerase_Chain_Reaction_and_Cataract_Surgery_Outcomes_of_Ebola_Survivors_in_Sierra_Leone
Are you quite sure?
JESUS CHRIST.
What is there to discuss, the fact he's even hearing the other side is nuts
British tank crews were involved in the successful capture of Tsaritsyn in 1919 alongside the White Russians under General Denikin. However, the Red Army re-took it within 6 months. Tsaritsyn later became much more famous as Stalingrad of WW2 fame, though it was renamed Volgograd in the 1950s.
But as it stands, 14th October 1066 remains the single day that shaped Britain more than any other.
Cultures weren't set in stone and fixed, indeed especially you're contrasting the conflict with the Norse, with the conflict with the victorious Normans - but two centuries earlier the Normans were themselves Norse Vikings.
Ultimately it was quite likely whoever in charge of England would evolve in a slightly different path to the rest of the continent.
None come from Evangelicals.
https://twitter.com/bobscartoons/status/1359457550522015744
Though do know of a few women who apparently were converted to lesbianism via (straight) marriage.
I think it’s the five year persistence that’s surprising.
And sorry to piss on your parade but, since it's estimated that 5% of children are not the biological offspring of their familial fathers, your descent line from William over say 40 generations will almost certainly not hold true.
But since we can be pretty certain William does have living descendants, we can rest assured we both are descended from him (as are all the others on here who are of largely British descent).
Seriously though, I'd like to hear Mill's reasoning. It seems rather implausible to me.
https://twitter.com/Cjamehk/status/1369505967944081413
Specially-selected cadre of young women were called upon to provide technical assistance on the gubernatorial staff.