Norman Pratt

B - H 17

Yes, John, agreed. We're definitely playing on the same 'GO' board! B - I 15

Hi John. I certainly didn't take that as provocative. In any case having an opponent whose been fluffing around since 2nd March 2009 without making a move is somewhat provocative in itself! Anyway, here goes: B: G 14

Hi John. Having got through the first 20 pages of 'Teach Yourself Go', I at last managed to hold the computer to a slightly less humiliating score. Morever, by using the 'Go Back' function on my 'Go' software, I finally figured out what I was doing wrong. Please be prepared for my next move on our previous game. Meanwhile I hope someone else takes up your latest challenge. Norman.

I was introduced to the idea that I was more likely to be related to Charlemagne than Alfred the Great about 50 years ago. It was surprising, but not shocking. The modern version is 'everyone of European ancestry is related to Charlemagne' or even (without having to go back 60,000 years) 'everyone (within a geographical area) is related to everybody'. What is more surprising is the sudden explosion of interest in genealogy which produces these 'shocks'. But then perhaps for a generation or two people had lost track of and then lost interest in their ancestry. An acquaintance of mine spent many years in Northern Kenya, developing a written version of the language of a nomadic tribe. However, my friend's inability to recite to his tribal contact the names of all his great-grand-parents was a bad start to the project. (No, I don't think the tribe in question shared a common ancestry with President Obama!) The conspiracy is surely the way we tend to select an interesting branch of the family tree and mentally chop off all the other branches.

More information on http://www.hoax-slayer.com/bt-unpaid-bill-phone-scam.shtml.'>http://www.hoax-slayer.com/bt-unpaid-bill-phone-scam.shtml. 'The elderly and vulnerable' is an interesting phrase. Having once been relieved by a con-artist of most of my money whilst hitch-hiking to Rome, I'm inclined to think that 'the young, naive, and vulnerable' are also at risk. Perhaps most people are vulnerable unless they habitually apply an electron microscope to every single proposition they are presented with - so all members of this Forum should be O.K. About a month ago I had an interesting phonecall. A woman made the initial call 'from a company with a connection with Microsoft', and then handed me over to an 'engineer'. Apparently they'd scanned my computer and if I didn't do something about it immediately it was going to break down. The 'engineer' didn't like being asked about his 'company' and rang off. N.B. The specific link above no longer (19.8.2010) works but http://www.hoax-slayer.com seems to be a good website for checking on scams, and particularly for sorting out the real threats from the mere nuisances and the 'Chinese whispers'.

There has been concern about the coalition government's plans for History teaching in English schools among those who might have to 'deliver' their version of history: My link A more useful History lesson to be learned from 1940 "junior allies" might be "a Fiat CR.42 crashed in a field near Orfordness lighthouse" - there's quite a good picture on Google images: just search for "italian+Orfordness".

In 1966 Ray Allen Billington produced a study called 'The Historian's contribution to Anglo-American misunderstanding: report of a committee on national bias in Anglo-American History Textbooks'. The study found that British Secondary School textbooks routinely ignored or glossed over the vital role of American troops in the First World War; American Junior High School textbooks on the other hand told a story of American frigates regularly defeating British battleships during the War of Independence (presumably on the basis that they were the 'goodies'). Rather than giving a balanced view of what happened these textbooks supported British and American myths. Historical myths had a role in building tribes, and more recently in building nations. In an age of globalisation they are toxic, and in an age of nuclear weapons potentially lethal. Many other countries, especially ones that don't regard themselves as especially favoured by God, have History syllabuses that tie their national history into the History of the wider world, and approach the subject critically. Military history is interesting, and I must admit I would sooner teach the impact of military technology than the impact of the ideas of Sir Isaac Newton. It is possible to look at History in almost purely military terms: my nearest major town was originally built as part of a defensive system against the Vikings, and there are counties in Northern England whose boundaries follow the winter cantonments of five Viking armies. However, apart from being good examples of the way odd things happen in History, these facts don't really explain much about the subsequent History of either the town or the counties. Looking at the development of technology through the development of military technology is positively misleading: for example civilian railways were often as important in winning wars as military inventions. And social, economic, technological and cultural Histories are all more fruitful ways of understanding History than looking at military technology. As for political bias any interpretation of History that ignores rampant capitalism in the stone age world (i.e. caves stuffed with an over-abundance of produce intended for overawing visitors) or, on the other hand, ignores the succinct 19th Century observation that 'property is theft', is not introducing young people to problems of the distribution of wealth as adults see and disagree about it. ''We as a nation were intended by God to be a light set on a hill to serve as a beacon of hope and Christian charity to a lost and dying world.'' As something of a biblical scholar I'm at a bit of a loss as to where to find this in the Bible. However, if sincerely meant and followed through it certainly would make a difference.

John, I wouldn't dare to challenge you on an even board, as presented last August. I think I might possibly at least be able to get a reasonable number of points if I can only get my head round the scoring - as I pointed out last June. Since retiring, my free time keeps disappearing, but I am now determined to find the hour or two (and a darkened room) required. at which point I would like to resume the game. One of the most enjoyable games of chess I've played was with a chess board placed on a lift, sent up and down between the Basement and the Ground Floor at the Odeon Haymarket, London, whilst doing the late night ushering shift. I am quite enjoying the thought of playing the longest game of 'Go' in History, and I hope you don't mind the odd 6 months gap between moves.

"We have just enough religion to make us hate, but not enough to make us love one another." Jonathan Swift. To answer John's question directly, yes, Swift was right at the time he wrote it, and sadly he's still right, certainly about Western Christianity. However, 'indifference' is probably a more deadly vice than hatred, partly because it is not so obvious. I think the word 'religion' is in any case redefining itself to mean 'somebody else's mode of spirituality, which I don't myself approve of, especially organised religion'. However, since Swift was writing in the context of the Anglican Church (presumably of Ireland) it's perhaps relevant to look at a modern case. As it happens Ireland in the late 1960's springs to mind, as I can still remember my brother, then a fairly new reporter on the Manchester Guardian, returning from Northern Ireland and announcing to me (knowing that I was interested in the subject) that the Troubles had nothing to do with religion. It depends on your definition I suppose. I have been following a recent bad case of politics and religion, trying to work out who or what is to blame for the following proposed law: http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/btb/wp-co...y-Bill-2009.pdf When the Uganda Anti-Homosexuality Bill 2009 first came to my notice my first thought was that it must be some sort of joke. Taking it seriously was not helped by the fact that it was introduced into the Parliament by Uganda's chief scout! But hate appears to be one of the motivating factors, and religion is certainly part of the story. It is quite possible it will be accepted by the Uganda Parliament quite soon. The Bill specifically rules out any acceptance of the idea (or defence) of sexual orientation, and basically reinforces the existing criminalisation of homosexuality in Uganda, creating the death penalty for what it calls 'aggravated homosexuality', heavy terms of imprisonment for lesser 'offences', and making it an offence not to report homosexual behaviour. Two consequences of the bill (even if the death penalty is removed) will be the weakening of a hitherto successful anti-HIV campaign, and an increased climate of fear in a country whose social structure is already in a delicate state. The introduction to the bill makes clear the mindset behind it: Uganda is apparently being corrupted by non-African influences, particularly gay-rights organisations. (Actually there is no strong gay organisation in Uganda, the Ugandan Unitarian Universalist Church having provided the organisation for what will probably be the last gay meeting before the Uganda Parliament votes on the bill.) There is a popular belief in Uganda that homosexuality is un-African and a European import. The government will therefore gain widespread popularity if it throws its weight behind what is at the moment a private member's bill. President Museveni has an interesting choice: he can bow to the pressure of world leaders and repeat his excuse that there are 'foreign policy considerations', or set himself up as a chamption of African independence and integrity against neo-colonial interference (a role that certainly didn't do Mugabe any harm.) http://africanpress.wordpress.com/2010/01/...bill-until-now/ It is also possible that Museveni may be tempted to use this law to attack political opponents, because it would be even easier for a simple denunciation to the police to put an opponent in gaol. This kind of thing already happens in Uganda, the brother of the Archbishop of York being a fairly recent victim. There is a good deal of hate in this bill. One local radio station allegedly called for homosexuals to be killed. If the bill becomes law and is implemented of course homosexuals will be killed, by the state, but there is also a real danger of the law also giving the green light to vigilantism. The root cause of this state of affairs is therefore widespread prejudice, in Uganda and elsewhere in Africa, about the nature of homosexuality. Academics who refer to the fact that homosexuality can be found within traditional African cultures are simply not believed. Another cause has been controversy in Uganda over the relative merits of condoms and abstinence in the prevention of HIV/Aids. When Uganda was under the British neo-colonial system I found it fairly easy to understand what was going on: it was peculiarly inept to say the least to support Amin, a simple apparently jolly fellow who had worked his way up in the ranks to become one of the two African officers in the Uganda army at the time of independence. Now Uganda has become an American neo-colonial colony I am finding it more difficult to follow. Is this all about the American Political Evangelical Right interfering in Uganda? http://www.examiner.com/x-4107-Internation...e-name-of-Jesus Or was it the three American evangelists addressing a conference in Kampala about 'healing' gays, in March 2009, that fed directly into a frenzy of political homophobia, and the introduction of the Anti-Homosexuality Bill? http://www.sexualminoritiesuganda.org/inde...h&Itemid=55 Despite some foreign 'religious' support for the bill, most churches in the Western world came out against it, rather slowly, following in the wake of political statements by world leaders such as the Canadian and British Prime Ministers, and of course the American President. In Uganda the only Church that has expressed any real sympathy towards the gay minority, as far as I am aware, is the Unitarian church mentioned above. The Anglican Church of Uganda, for example, has welcomed the principles of the Bill (which include the rejection of any idea of sexual orientation), but has suggested one or two amendments for its implementation. (For the record the American evangelist, Rick Warren, who has considerable influence in Uganda, has condemned the bill.) What is rather more disturbing to me is that a number of Christian evanglical organisations in Britain were very slow in appreciating that this was a clear issue of human rights, irrespective of any belief that 'homosexuality is a sin', and therefore missed an opportunity to send a clear message to Christians in Uganda that they ought not to be supporting this bill. The organised church in the Western World seems to me to be about 200 years behind everybody else in understanding Christian ethics. However, there are churches, particularly in the developing world, where Christians don't find it difficult to support the downtrodden and the poor, because they are the downtrodden and poor, and where you will find many instances of love overcoming hatred. For the time being, and despite my having myself once enjoyed the fellowship of Ugandan Christians, you can cross Uganda off that list.

Transparency and honesty are vital whatever the issue, and it is unfortunate that the scientists concerned contributed neither. (And not having any statistical background I can't comment on that aspect.) I found this a useful summary, pending further reading: http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory?id=9319400 The 'menace of overpopulation' could also be described as the 'menace of over-consumption'. There was an interesting series of articles about overpopulation in 'New Scientist' in September which pointed out that, among other things, that the age balance of a population was as significant as overall numbers: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg2032...n-delusion.html In my own main area of interest, Africa, there is no doubt that an overpopulation myth that was believed by many Rwandese in 1994 was a major cause of the Rwanda genocide. Shortly after this event it was pointed out that there was no actual scientific evidence, surprisingly, that increasing population leads to diminishing availibility of food. (Rwanda, death, despair and defiance' pub. African Rights 1994) My own candidate as the biggest threat to world security after Copenhagen is undoubtedly the nation state. As they say on Star Wars at moments of stress: 'There are too many of them!!' But however many of them there are they have failed in their primary function which is to provide security for their citizens.

Disagreement within the Scientific community is one thing. Another is the failure of the education system over a long period of time to provide people with an understanding of how science works. As Britain looks forward to a brief cold snap, my heart sinks at the thought of this being cited as evidence that global warming is nothing to worry about. When scientists argue fiercely even over whether there is a scientific consensus it leaves the rest of us with just scraps of anecdotal evidence to go on: http://af.reuters.com/article/oddlyEnoughN...E5BA37O20091211 Aha! So it was the icecream companies ...

It's a subject desperately in need of a sense of humour. Try http://www.shipoffools.com

I am pleased to report that one of the BNP parish councillors in the village where I live resigned (quite soon after being elected) on discovering that most of the day-to-day issues that concern people have very little to do with immigration. One nevertheless hears of more intelligent and better-informed people sometimes failing to question the assumption that our island will 'sink' if immigration isn't stopped. The 'population delusion' (on a world scale) is the subject of a series of articles in 'New Scientist' http://www.newscientist.com/special/population .

History probably began when people started singing about the deeds of their ancestors. Later this became tribal songs, and later still - by jingo - 'national songs'. Now that it is widely recognised we live in a global village (not that we haven't always lived in a global village) - and an international song book is required. To put it another way an 'English' national history doesn't make sense in isolation - whatever colour you make it, since English history is intertwined with the History of the rest of the British Isles. Not only that, but most important changes in the world can be understood only in the context of regional and world history. However, getting this balance into a school curriculum is difficult, particularly as often the only history that makes immediate sense to young people is local history. Schools were actually tackling this in the 1970's, and producing syllabuses with a much more balanced view - I can remember an excellent syllabus produced by an ANC refugee from Apartheid in an Essex secondary school. But this shouldn't have been a cottage industry: it required the same resources as are now being put into supporting the National Curriculum. Then in the 80's Thatcherism plus the Falklands War killed off, amongst other things, any notion that there was such as thing as 'human history'. The notion of 'Black History' in British schools was, in my view, one of the many compromises History teachers adopted in order to instill some sort of balance into the jingoistic stuff that initially came out the History National Curriculum. Although History in the National Curriculum now encourages a much more critical approach to the content of history, there is still a long way to go. I hesitate to raise their hit rate, so I won't give their web address, but the 'English Pride' website of the BNP demonstrates just the sort of nonsense that has crept in because of a long period of government interference in History teaching.

Hi John. Love your website. We in Essex appreciate what Deira did for us - sending the first Christian missionaries here that made any headway. When St Cedd first arrived in Bradwell (just up the Roman road from here) rumour has it that the first thing he said to the young man who greeted his boat was 'Eee-oop lad'. (However, I've no documentary evidence for this.) Septimus Severus was an African Roman emperor, who at the end of his life had a go at conquering Scotland, and instilling some team spirit into his sons. He failed in both, though he did manage to negotiate a lasting treaty with the Picts, before dying in York in 211 A.D. Black History, as you've pointed out, doesn't seem to be accepted as part of the mainstream of British History, so it's good that October is increasingly recognised as 'Black History Month' in schools. http://www.blackhistory4schools.com/ What we think of as 'History' owes a lot to what the education system has defined as 'History'. The subject of 'History' was introduced into the curriculum in the 19th Century as a response to the rise of the British Empire. This included the idea that Britain had a civilizing mission in the territories she controlled, and this idea also carried heavy racial overtones. The idea that black people might have anything to offer - Mary Seacole is a glaring example - was filtered out of 'History'. Your examples appear almost 'querky' because we have got used to the early 20th century notion of one country/one race/one language. This became a self-fulfilling prophecy - by the end of the century the ethnic and linguistic jigsaw that had been Europe had turned into a continent of 'nationalities' each with its own state, and we are now quite surprised when we hear that at the beginning of the 20th Century most Italians didn't speak Italian and most French didn't speak French. History books can be dangerously wrong. In 1966 I introduced African history into a Uganda school. (Before that African history wasn't considered important enough.) I had to read a page ahead in the latest scholarly history books (the textbooks not having been written yet). Ideas about tribal origins, which suggested some cattle-herding 'tribes' were more advanced, and hence became the ruling 'tribes', have turned out to be dangerous nonsense. In Rwanda similar myths, that the Tutsis were a kind of master race and less 'African' than the Hutus, were one of the factors that brought about Africa's own holocaust in 1994. I think what I'm saying is that most traditionally-trained historians need desperately to read up on archaeology and anthropology.

My computer 'Go' has very brief documentation which includes the comment that Go is more complex than Chess. What's more the computer's stones consistently surrounded my stones at the precise moment I had - or thought I had - surrounded them! Simultaneously most of the other points on the board were pronounced captured territory by the computer. Hence a pause for reflection while I try to work out what's going on! Anyway, thank you for your encouragement to continue. I will take inspiration from that splendid quotation from The Goons 'Surround the castle, Eccles!' and will come up with my next move shortly.

John. Thanks for the skirmish on one corner of the board - which I can foresee being repeated elsewhere - and for your amazing commentary on the game of 'Go'. I am just hoping I don't have to disembowel myself in order to resign. Best wishes, Norman.

It's last-minute revision time for Edexcel A2 History, so thanks very much, John; very timely!

B: F16

B: G17

B: J 12 - i.e. the move that prevents my stone being captured, not the 'J 12' marked on the photograph. (I have a feeling my board isn't quite up to international standards, as it doesn't have an 'I' row! I will re-label it next time I take a photo so it does.)

Tony Benn appeared on the BBC News Channel this morning. He insisted on giving out the contact details himself (twice!) so that people could contribute to the charity appeals for Gaza, despite the valiant efforts of the interviewer to 'move on'.

B: H 15

B: E 16