Hi Jayb,

Yes, weren't those Richards' Topical Encyclopedias fantastic ? Volume 15 was the Index and Atlas, and the Atlas separated 'North Australia' from 'Central Australia', so our set must have been a 1930s edition. Or at least the Atlas was. My mum 'bought' a set from a travelling salesman on time payment in Bass Hill in 1951, put nothing down, and never saw him again. So we got the whole set for free. Hours, days, weeks, months of complete enjoyment. They saved me from a life of gormlessness, to an extent.

And of all subjects, history may be the most fascinating, there is just so much of it, endless mysteries to uncover. Thanks, Jayb.

Joe

Hi Joe, yes that's the one. When my parents moved into their Retirement Village they threw out a lot of stuff. We were all invited to come & take our pick. I didn't want the full set I just wanted Vol 14. Well it was the raggeist book you ever saw. My mom said that I had read all the print off the pages. I still have it. Then one day I was at a bush 2nd hand place & there was another set although incomplete. I searched high & low & found Vol 14 in perfect condition. $2. When the Grandkids wanted a story on going to bed, what do you think they got.

I'm on Ancestry.com. Going back I'm related to Beowulf, Pepin the Great. (I guess we all are to him) I have at least a dozen Saints, Dozens of Kings,(Plantagenet's.) Judith, in the Bible & as far as I've got back so far to a 385BC Egyptian Pharaoh. A Chinese warlord who married a daughter of a Hungarian King. The Stuarts are most interesting. $ brothers married 4 women & each of them sired multiple children each of the wives. In a sort of Musical Chairs. I suppose when they started to nag too much it was time to rotate. :-) I'm related to all of them. Actually I think we all are. The sons & daughters of Kings spread eventually into a broad base down to pheasant stock then one of the GGGGrand kids get lucky, becomes rich & becomes another leader & it starts all over again. I find the number of brothers & sisters marrying is high, so is 1st & second 3rd cousins, even aunts & uncles. Baby betrothals are also high especially for Kings. That really stuffs up the timeline when the mother is 14 & the husband is 90 & the mother dies in childbirth. (X2)

Here's one for you.

The French beat the English at the Battle of Orleans under Command of St. Joan of Arc. Oh no they didn't.

They weren't French Troops. They were two Regiments of Donalds from Scotland. They were the Dofants private Bodyguard which the Doufant gave to Joan because he didn't trust his own soldiers. My Grandmother was a Donald.

Um Val

Looking at your menagerie of 30 dolls http://www.megacom.net/~arkones/mondo.html it is essential to include:

- Aboriginal and Torres Strait doll - top right corner? and

- obligatory LGBT doll - bottom right corner?

Of Bass and Flinders some rewriting or more accurate history is taking place, hence:

"...for two unmarried men isolated on vessels in far-flung locations.

“There was a time, when I was so completely wrapped up in you, that no conversation but yours could give me any degree of pleasure …” Flinders wrote to Bass towards the end of this period, “And yet it is not clear to me that I love you entirely …" *

* See more at: http://nofibs.com.au/2015/06/27/navigating-prejudice-burgewords-explores-matthewflinders/#sthash.WxEHlPnw.dpuf

Val

I hadn't heard of Mondo dolls either and did a search on Google images.

What I found from the images I looked at was that well over 2-thirds of the dolls were males with weapons. (So, history lesson no.1 - war is much more important than peace; aggro males have far more prestige than non-aggro males and males have much more prestige than females.)

Less than 1-third were women and of these, 2 out of 3 were obviously high born. (So, history lesson no.2 - men are much more important than women, regardless of whether they are high or low born, but if women are to have any recognition or importance, they must either be high born or achieve the equivalent of high-born status.)

Less than 1-sixth of the selection comprised people - either male or female - from the non-gentry, non-warrior classes. These are people who would have lived out their lives working in humble jobs and earning a humble wage. (So, lesson no.3 - the rich are sexy, glamorous winners and the poor are boring, frumpy losers.)

If history is boring to young people, then this is probably because: 1. most young people belong to the non-warrior, non-gentry classes, 2. most young people grow up in homes where the breadwinner(s) work in humble jobs for humble wages, and 3. half of all people are women.

Hi Killarney,

You suggest that "If history is boring to young people, then this is probably because: 1. most young people belong to the non-warrior, non-gentry classes, 2. most young people grow up in homes where the breadwinner(s) work in humble jobs for humble wages, and 3. half of all people are women."

That's precisely why people need to learn as much as they can from history, how did things get this way, why are they oppressed, or treated as 'out-groups', in order to understand better what to do about it.

From a conspiracy point of view, it's clear that the 'in-group' people want to keep the rest of us ignorant. Their most effective strategy for this is to ensure that 'out-groups' don't question their position, that they just put up with it.

Unwittingly, you have swallowed their line, with respect :)

Cheers,

Joe