Exclusive: Majority of British people found to have ‘shockingly little’ knowledge about Black British history

  • GreyShuck@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Whilst I am sympathetic to the overall aim of this, things like this:

    She would have expected people to name figures such as Quintus Lollius Urbicus, who became governor of Roman Britain

    …do stand out as being a a bit unrealisitic. I mean, how many governors of Roman Britain of any race or nationality can the typical Briton actually name? I’d be surprised if it was more than 1 and probably less than that.

    And if the expectation is that anyone would know of this guy only because his chief contribution to history is “being black” then I am not sure what we are gaining here.

  • jsdz@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    She would have expected people to name figures such as Quintus Lollius Urbicus, who became governor of Roman Britain

    Look, I know everyone in Britain is required to know the names and dates of all the monarchs going back to the 9th century, but expecting everyone to be able to come up with that name when put on the spot is going a little too far.

  • Lath@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    Pish-posh! Obviously every true briton should know of their one and only Black Prince!

  • UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    I can name one: KSI.

    Not Bri’ish, sorry. Don’t know much about Bri’ish history. Please excuse my ignorance.

  • NeuronautML@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    I’m no Briton and i just know a few bits here and there of British history, but isn’t the UK a traditionally mostly white country ?

    I’m guessing half of say, Norwegians, also can’t name a black Norwegian historical figure either. I’m betting it’s even more than that and they’re the most immediate neighbors of the UK.

    I’m not saying they’re not important to be remembered, or that there weren’t black people in Europe since the Roman times, here and there, but statistically speaking, black people were the overwhelming minority.

    • idiomaddict@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      Norway didn’t colonize the West Indies or Africa (though they ran the Société du Madal for Portugal), thereby increasing the number of black Norwegians to include residents of entirely new majority black countries. There are a lot of black Brits.

      Also, why Norway and not France (physically closer, comparable colonial history) or the Republic of Ireland (former colony, significant “shared history” during the colonial times, literally touching)?

      • NeuronautML@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Oh right yeah the colonial times. I guess when i was thinking about historical Britain i was thinking about celtic/roman/viking/medieval times. I tend to gloss over colonial times, i find that part of history not to be very appealing to me, but yeah, makes sense. Lots of black people because of the slave trade.

        I picked east, i could’ve picked west, or south sure. No reason in particular.