Featured

Aylesbury Vale Industrial Exhibition

A few years ago, I went to a talk on the Industrial Exhibition of Aylesbury Vale. I was so fascinated by it that I decided to base my Master’s thesis around it. The chapter included the impact of the Rothschild family on Aylesbury Vale, didn’t make the final cut into my thesis. However, it is such an interesting aspect of Buckinghamshire history, I can’t quite let it fall by the wayside.

The 1851 Great Exhibiton of London, partly bank rolled by the Rothschild Bank, was a great success. What followed was countless Industrial Exhibitons across the country. All the major industrial cities held Exhibitions, mainly showcasing the industry and innovations that were a part of them. The Aylesbury Vale one was not much different, except in one regard, it showcased the talents of the home workers of the Vale. Though industry did feature, so did lace making, straw plaiting, carpentry, to name a few. It took weeks of research to build a picture of the Exhibition, looking at newspapers from across the country, as very little is known about it.

As I was researching, I got the sense of what the intention was behind it. The competition for lace making had moved up a gear by the introduction of machinery in places such as Nottingham. Straw plaiting from abroad was finer and more cost effective, Bucks was in the process of losing two of its main cottage industries. For a time, after the Exhibition, the two industries picked up and managed to survive after other areas had stopped. There was also the issue of Aylesbury, a large town with very little industry. It was only about two years after the Exhibtion that industries moved into Aylesbury, creating more jobs and opportunities for those from the town, and surrounding villages.

How much of this was down to the Exhibition is hard to say. Aylesbury Vale had not been seen as industry worthy before, though Hazell, Watson and Viney had moved out of London prior to the Exhibiton, and into Aylesbury. None of the cottage industries had taken off into factories, as they had done in other parts of the country. With excellent connections to London and Birmingham, it is hard to see why Aylesbury was left until the latter part of the nineteenth century to become an industrial area. It could be argued, that the Exhibition, making the front page of national papers, may have encouraged people to look at Aylesbury Vale with a different view. One thing that is sure, once industry moved in, Aylesbury would never be the same again.

Eugenics and Education

The Eugenics Movement affected the education system in Britain, and to some extent we can see patterns of it in policy even today.

Francis Galton believed that there was a hierarchy of society, and where you were reflected your intelligence. Those in the upper echelons of society were intelligent and had great worth to society. On the other hand, the lower classes were lacking in intelligence and of little use to society. He gathered statistics on memory, perception, and imagination, using them to define what ‘normal’ was. He was then able to determine how many people should be at each level of ‘mental ability’. These were then placed into various Education Acts throughout the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries.

The 1851 census gathered data on those who were deaf, dumb, and blind, but by 1871 this also included those who were classed as imbeciles and idiots. These changes were reflective of all aspects of society.

With the introduction of the 1870 Forster Education Act and the Education (Scotland) Act 1872, a link was created between teachers’ salaries and pupil results. Along with this, it also gave schools the ability to determine whether children were ‘ineducable’ and therefore could be excluded from education. This supported teachers who struggled to teach certain children, keeping their salaries low, but also meant that those excluded would have no education at all.

In 1886, The Idiots Act, created a definition between idiots and imbeciles. This led to the Departmental Committee on Defective and Epileptic Children. The Committee claimed that imbeciles would need placing in an asylum, and those who were feeble-minded could attend special schools. Those defined as idiots remained outside of education. Schools employed Medical Officers to determine what diagnosis a child should have and therefore whether they should be educated in schools or not.

The Egerton Report on the Royal Commission on the Blind, the Deaf and the Dumb of the United Kingdom, 1889, suggested a system whereby children who were blind and deaf, in any capacity, would have to have separate classes. In Central Scotland, these children were still educated in mainstream classes.

1893 Elementary Education (Deaf and Blind) Children Act implemented the Egerton Report suggestion of teaching children with disabilities in different classes. This was followed up by the Defective and Epileptic Children Act of 1899 which implemented special schools and classes for defective children, up to the age of 16. The idea being they would produce unskilled male labour and domestic workers, so they need not have any formal education.

By 1904, it became clear to certain people that there needed to be a formal test to determine mental capacity, rather than a doctor’s diagnosis. Alfred Binet came up with the Binet-Simon test, were they determined what score ‘normal’ children would have and then create a mental age.

This was expanded in 1910, by Stanford University’s Louis Terman. The Stanford-Binet test created the idea that by taking the mental age and dividing it by the child’s chronological age, which was then multiplied by 100, the Intelligence Quotient (IQ) of a child could be calculated.

In the early part of the twentieth century, the 1902 Balfour Education Act created Local education Authorities, responsible for the schools, as well as specialist schools. The 1908 Royal Commission on the Feeble-minded, took their cue from the eugenicists, claiming that these children had inherited their feeble-mindedness. Those responsible for these children led lives of criminality, promiscuity and were degenerates. Sir James Crichton-Browne claimed that they were ‘our social rubbish [who] should be swept up and garnered and utilised as far as possible.’ The difficulty was, for those who wished to do this, that they apparently masqueraded as normal people and could not be picked out by sight. The Commission stated that these children were unfit for life, and therefore be placed into institutions. This also suited the idea that the family had created the problem, withdrawing them from it would be best policy. They also were not fit to have an education so should be excluded from it.

This was formalised in the 1913 Moral Deficiency Act, which allowed the LEA to determine who were the ‘moral defectives’, those that were idiots, imbeciles, feeble-minded and create special schools for them, one was called the Colony for Mental Defectives. Eugenicists wanted the Act to go further and prohibit marriage between defectives. However, this was not included, though anyone who was caught having sex outside marriage was classed as mentally defective, then sent to a residential home.

The first child psychologist in the UK, Cyril Burt, collected data on twins and by using IQ tests confirmed that intelligence was inherited. He created a test that could determine whether a borderline child was deficient or not. The test took just six minutes, and it was later discovered the data he collected was fraudulent, created to fit in with his personal views.

The 1914 Act was never implemented due to the war, but it would have allowed LEAs to send any physically disabled child to the same place as those who were considered mentally defective. The 1918 Education Act made the education of ‘physically defective’ children compulsory, so they could no longer be out of the system.

Recording of the feeble-minded, defective, and backward, as well as those who were blind, deaf, mentally epileptic, and mentally defective, was made compulsory by the 1921 Education Act. By the 1927 Mental Deficiency Act, most of these children were placed into institutions.

Though the Eugenics movement did not have as much support as in other countries, such as Nazi Germany, during the 1920s and 1930s they did have a following. Ernest William McBride, of the Eugenics Education Society, was also Professor of Zoology at Imperial College, London, and a Fellow of the Royal Society. In 1929, he wrote in the Eugenics Review:

‘The slums of Liverpool and Glasgow are being filled with a stunted population of so-called Celts from Wales and Ireland, really belonging to the Mediterranean race. They have a low standard of life and breed like rabbits, and under sentimental notions now in fashion the Nordic element [English and Scots] is called on to support them and thus indirectly contribute to its own undoing. The great problem of eugenics, in my view, is fundamentally racial: the breeding of mental defectives, deaf mutes, etc., is bad; but such mutations at worst from a small proportion of the population – and tend in the long run to die out. The real problem is to seek means to prevent the higher racial elements from being swamped by the lower.’

The Wood Committee Report, of 1929, defined the boundaries of IQ test results. Those scoring under 20 were classed as Idiots, Imbeciles had an IQ of between 20-50, with the Feeble-minded with an IQ of 60 or more. This last one was re-categorised as including the dull and backward and increased to an IQ of 70 or more.

During the years of the Depression, the most important category was that of being ‘fully human’, as they would be the ones who could be useful to society. Special schools were under utilised as people did not like the stigma attached to them.

During the war it was determined as necessary to create a three-tier system of grammar schools, secondary modern and technical colleges. The Butler Act of 1944 used IQ tests, in the form of the 11+, to determine which school children should be sent to, based on the tests designed in 1910. This was a way of keeping as many children as possible in the mainstream education system. What it created was a system were those who had most value to society where placed into grammar schools, the rest distributed between the secondary modern, and what technical colleges existed. The curriculum for them were completely different and girls were disadvantaged by quotas, at grammar schools, to ensure they did not outnumber the boys. This continued in some areas until the 1980s. The Act also defined 11 categories of deficiencies. These were the blind; diabetic; partially sighted; educationally subnormal; deaf; epileptic; partially hearing; maladjusted; delicate; physically handicapped; and speech defective. These categories would then determine how the children would be treated for educational purposes. Most ended up in segregated schools which were not allowed to take the 11+ and had a record of poor education. There was no opportunity for them to develop.

In 1947 there were 12,060 children in subnormal schools, by 1955 this shot up to 22,639, with 12,000 on the waiting lists and another 27,000 waiting a final diagnosis. This equated to 10% of the school population.

The Crowther Report on the Central Advisory Council for Education in 1959, believed that girls were genetically built for marriage and homemaking. This led to schools creating a special curriculum based on domestic science and childcare, with boys having more technical subjects such as woodwork. This continued right through until the National Curriculum was introduced in 1988. Poor children were genetically unable to cope with academic subjects, so those of the secondary modern and technical colleges tended to be more practical subjects. University for these children was not even considered a possibility. This tied in with the 1963 Newton Report which said that education needed to be more relevant to the requirements of the children.

The 1970 Education (Handicapped Children Act) and the 1974 Education (Mentally Handicapped Children) (Scotland), stated that all children should receive an education. The Local Education Authorities were responsible in providing a comprehensive system to be able to do this. The three-tier system of lower, middle, and upper schools was the response, with grammar schools falling out of favour for being elitist, and not benefitting all children. This was under the Labour government, which led to a campaign by Conservatives believing that the poor of the working class (Labour voters’ children) would hold back and diminish the intelligence of the intelligent children (Conservative voters’ children). The basis being the idea that working-class children were physically and mentally deficient compared to their middle-class counterparts.

By the time of the Warnock Report in 1978, 40% of schools had special classes. The Report determined the need for terms to be used as descriptive, rather than for classification of a child’s condition. It also suggested that special classes should be flexible in approach, as children should only use them when needed. The needs of the child were being considered as the main reason for the help and support given.

This came into force under the 1981 Education Act, but by 1987 a greater percentage of pupils were in special schools than in the 1950s.

By 1988 and the introduction of the National Curriculum, schools were treated as a business. Though the National Curriculum was based on attainment for all, the introduction of League Tables, in the Act, created a school market.

Creating a marketplace and instigating performance related pay, are not much different to the conditions of the 1870s. With comments on the restrictions of the curriculum, and now University degrees, who is it actually benefitting? It seems more of a backward step than a future development. Who can say what children of the future will go onto be once they have left school and University? They certainly cannot.

Sadly, it shows that 140 years later, education is still based more on economic policy than education policy. Only those who can pass a restrictive curriculum are any value to society. Though not eugenics in name, the rhetoric is incredibly similar.

 

 

Race and Eugenics

This particular piece of writing has been quite a few years in the making. I first encountered the Eugenics Movement when studying about inclusion in education, which I have written about here. Following that I studied European Identities as part of my degree and started to come across the same ideas. It is something we do not teach, that we do not even consider it a lot of the time. Adam Rutherford has written ‘How to Argue with a Racist’ on the science behind the Eugenics Movement, and how it relates to racism today. This is a brief history behind that movement, and what implications it has had on race and European and American lives.

Enlightenment.

We always consider that the Enlightenment movement was just that, a way of thinking that changed our perspective, and that drove the abolition of slavery. However, that is just one side of it. Enlightenment was about the freedom of expression, and supposedly about tolerance. Enlightened thinkers believed that the past was about prejudice and irrational behaviour and wanted that to change, but that was only some of them.

Rousseau wrote in his Discourse (1754) that Europe ‘was more continuously and better civilised than other parts of the world’. This was the view that became prevalent, that those of a different nation or colour had failed to progress and had not formed a civilised society. In 1795, in his conclusion of Sketch, Condorcet wrote ‘[S]urvey the history of our settlements and commercial undertakings in Africa or Asia, and you will see our trade monopolies, our treachery, our murderous contempt for men of another colour or creed.’ Rosseau also created the idea that there were distinct human races. This was continued with the Theory of Progress, in which man could improve the world, and the Theory of Evolution.

Origin of Species

Darwin’s idea of evolution is still studied in schools today, I was teaching it a couple of weeks ago. What is not taught is the unintended consequence of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution.

In 1859, Darwin published his Origin of Species, which Darwin only used to categorise plants and animals, not humans. These ideas led to Social Darwinism, that those who do the best are the fittest and that there was little point in doing anything for those who did not fit into that category. Social Darwinism and social reform are linked, but only from the viewpoint that reform for people in the lower rankings was not worth the time and the effort.

Darwin’s cousin, Francis Galton, was also a scientist and on reading Darwin’s book he set about investigating human development. In 1871, Darwin mentions Galton several times in his book on The Descent of Man, which he claims humans were part of natural selection, mainly through sexual activity.

Galton believed in the idea that you could improve human “stock” by controlled breeding, as you would farm animals and racehorses. Of course, it would not be any old stock but those who were classed as worthy ‘eminent men are naturally superior and […] superior men are naturally eminent’ (Miller, 1962). These were what the Americans would later describe as ‘Anglo-Saxon, Nordic types.’

Eugenics

In 1873, Galton wrote to The Times espousing that Africa should be left to the Chinese, that they should alter ‘and finally displace’ the native African. The Chinese were considered far more productive and committed than the work-shy and useless African. A little while later he wrote in Fraser’s Magazine that there was a genetic underclass which needed to be bred out of society. Soon his ideas would travel across the Atlantic.

In 1894, the Immigration Restriction League was founded in America. They believed that immigrants were diluting the Anglo-Saxon heritage of the American stock and wanted a literacy test for all immigrants. The belief was that immigrants were poorly educated and not intelligent enough to pass the tests so would not be allowed in the country. The Bill was overruled on a number of occasions, until it was finally passed in 1917.

In 1902, Galton was awarded the Darwin Award by the Royal Society, as well as made an Honorary Fellow at Trinity College, Cambridge. In 1909 he was awarded a knighthood. This was not only for his work on eugenics, sadly this has overshadowed his amazing life as a scientist. His supporters for eugenics included H.G. Wells and George Bernard Shaw, as well as some who we would now consider social reformers such as the Webbs.

In 1904, Galton created a research fellowship at UCL. This was followed soon after by the creation in Berlin of the German Society for Race Hygiene, who were staunch supporters of Galton. Galton appointed Karl Pearson as the Director of the Eugenics Record Office in London. The Record Office stored thousands of pedigrees of suitable people, and this was followed up by Offices in Germany, Canada and America in 1911.

In 1906, J.H. Kellogg created the Race Betterment Foundation, and at the same time The American Breeders Association was also founded. This was for breeding of humans, not animals.

The creation of the Eugenics Education Society (EES), in 1907, was hoped to run alongside Pearson and the Record Office. Pearson though, was not as extreme in his thinking, and diverged from the EES.

Galton died in 1911, but his legacy of eugenics lived on.

The Liberal government and the start of the welfare state, in Britain, stopped the Eugenics Movement taking hold except in 1931, when the first compulsory sterilisation act was put forward, but never passed.

Thirty-two American states had sterilisation programmes for ‘undesirables.’ These included immigrants, people of colour, the poor, unmarried mothers, the disabled and mentally ill as well as Native Americans. California was so successful in its programme that a man called Adolf Hitler copied some of their ideas into his own vision of the perfect Aryan.

After 1924, Americans became concerned about the ‘inferior stock’ coming from Eastern and Southern Europe, so a hierarchy of nationalities was created of those welcome in the country. The top included anyone of Anglo-Saxon or Nordic descent, with those from China and Japan at the bottom.

The Law for the Prevention of Genetically Diseased Offspring was created by the Nazi party in 1933. This prevented children being born to people with certain medical conditions, it is estimated that 400,000 sterilizations were carried out.

1935 saw the Nazi party introduce the Marital Health Law, which made marriage between those who were healthy, and those who were genetically unfit, illegal. The same year saw the Nazi Blood Protection Law introduced which made marriage between Jews and non-German Jews a criminal offence. Followed by the Reich Central Office for Combating Homosexuality and Abortion, the year after.

In 1938, The Euthanasia Society of America was started, but luckily did not take off and ideas of segregation and sterilisation were the preferred methods.

Between 1939 and 1940, 140,000 physically and mentally disabled people were murdered by the Nazi Party, in Germany. The period of 1941-1945 saw six million Jews murdered; 1.8-3 million Poles; 5.7 million Soviet Civilians; 2.8 million – 3.3 million Soviet POWs; 300,000-600,000 Serbs; 270,000 disabled; 130,000-500,000 Romanies; 80,000-200,000 Freemasons; 20,00-25,000 Slovenes; 5,000-15,000 Homosexuals; 3,500 Spanish Republicans; 1,250-5,000 Jehovah’s Witnesses. This was the extreme end of the Eugenics Movement, but it did not stop the movement from continuing.

Lower class whites, and all people of colour were determined as a risk to the breeding of the perfect Americans. There was a need to control those who were part Asian and part Mexican, and in the Southern States the need to control the reproduction of black African Americans. ‘Mississippi appendectomies’ was the name for the sterilisation of those who went in for simple appendectomies. Girls between the ages of nine and eighteen were sterilised as practice for medical students.

In the 1970s and 1980s appendectomies of Native American women also involved sterilisation. Between 1970 and 1976 in the region of 25-50% were sterilised in this way.

Between 2006 and 2010, 150 female inmates in Californian jails were sterilised without consent, because of their criminality.

The Eugenics Movement had such an impact on American society that in 2015 the Eugenics Compensation Act was passed. This allowed survivors of the Eugenics Movement to be financially compensated. In North Carolina they gave $35000 to 220 survivors, in Virginia the compensation amounted to $25000 each.

From the late nineteenth century and into the twenty-first century, eugenics has formed the basis of policy and political thinking across continents. This brief history is only a small part of what the Eugenics Movement has achieved.  From the poor to the disabled, those of colour, non-Christians, LGBT, we are still carrying on the myths created by the Movement back in the 1870s, and sadly, these ideas are still flourishing in some areas. When we finally recognise where the problem exists, it may be easier to stop it.

Archaeology in the history classroom

Archaeological Record

I am completely biased on this, as a community archaeologist I know what impact archaeology can have on the community, and how exciting it is to children! The archaeological record is a vital part of our heritage.

I think this often gets forgotten in the classroom setting. For our current Year 7’s, I compiled a series of lessons on the different aspects of archaeology, and how archaeologists help tell the real hidden stories of the world.

Before any archaeology company, or group, carries out excavation work, desktop assessments have to be carried out. These include mapping the area, as well as recording the information regarding each time period. These are called Written Schemes of Investigation (WSI). Due to the amount of building work, houses and infrastructure, the archaeology is changing the way that we view certain periods of history.

The archaeology tells us what the written records often can’t, about the daily lives of those throughout history. What they ate, the type of houses they lived in, how they were buried, to name just a few.

Archaeology doesn’t just happen in the UK, but across the world. In the last year archaeology has changed the view of the Ancient Maya, increased the amount of known Ancient Egyptian buildings along the Nile, found new African migration patterns during the early human period, and new DNA studies have shown contact between Ancient Polynesians and South Americans in 1200 AD, this is only a fraction of the new discoveries! These are all fantastic additions to ‘Meanwhile, Elsewhere’ and can easily be found online as archaeologists are always keen to share their findings on a global scale.

Contacting your local museum, or even searching online for the Heritage Environment Record (HER) for your area, can show information that will add greatly to local studies. These may be find spots, but will be able to tell you how far back your local history goes. My local written record only goes to the late Anglo-Saxons, our archaeology record goes back to the Mesolithic. Some of our local geophys shows the change from Iron Age building to Roman. With LIDaR freely available anyone can see what is hidden beneath their feet! Local Archaeology companies often do outreach. My Year 6’s and 7’s loved being able to touch Anglo-Saxon pottery, I am lucky enough to be custodian of my local archaeological group’s archive which often ‘visits’ our school. Some companies, and local archaeology groups, will even come and carry out a dig in your school (Covid-19 not withstanding). They will also come and give talks, adding to your cultural capital. There is so much that archaeology can add to your history lessons!

 

Newspapers and Parish Magazines

Researching local history can sometimes be a bit hit and miss. It can either lead to a fruitful abundance or leave you with nothing! This happened to me several times whilst doing my research, so I thought I would share how I found a solution.

Newspapers

I knew our village was a straw plait village. I had anecdotal evidence, the names were recorded in the census records, but there was nothing written down! My local archive had nothing for our village, so I felt like I was going to have to give up on a significant part of our village history of the Industrial Revolution. I started reading books and studies on the area, hoping to glean something, but the information was no different to what I already knew. I was almost going to give up hope when I decided to do a local newspaper search. I struck gold. I found myself researching crimes linked to the plaiting, details of the plait school contravention of the 1867 Factory Act, as well as a push towards a revival at the end of the nineteenth century. It became a very different story to the one I was going to tell originally, it gave me more depth and understanding. I have recently used this information to create a ‘Meanwhile, Nearby…..’.

Newspapers are a fantastic source of information. I use them all the time. They also reflect the different newspaper owners, very much like today. Some comparisons between how one paper reports to another is fascinating. Just as they are used today in teaching law and politics, they also have a place in the history classroom, vitally important if you are teaching local history.

Parish Magazines

Pre-Masters, whilst I was still doing my History degree, I was tasked with researching Emergency Planning. This involved a visit to the archive for a search of the Parish Council Minutes for WWI and WWII. It turned out to be a complete waste of time, there was barely any mention of the wars, except for complaints about the RAF men and the local village dances! I explained to the archivist what I wanted, and he didn’t seem surprised at all that my search had been fruitless! He suggested the Parish Magazines, disappeared and come out with two huge piles. As I went through them a new project started to take hold. The War Memorial was the only information that we had for those that served in WWI. Reading the Magazines I managed to get the names of more than 300 men that served. In most cases I also had details of which theatre of war they served in. It was also an almost complete history of the home front. Sadly, the magazines stopped in mid 1918, but the information prior to that was fantastic. I created a blog, with the plan of adding in WWII as well, but never quite got around to it. I researched some of the topics so I could understand better how the village’s home front fitted in with a more national picture. The site does need updating, though it does show how a project could work within a school. http://wingatwar.org

Parish Magazines first started in 1859, with the Rev. John Erskine Clarke, the Vicar of St. Michael’s in Derby. By the end of the Victorian era they were widely used in dioceses across the country. The insert was generally mass produced and could contain anything from stories to recipes. In WWI and WWII, they also included information on air raid precautions and wartime recipes. The outside pages were devoted to the Parish. This was whatever information the person/s writing it wanted to include. Generally, this was parish news, connected to the church and school, births, deaths and marriages. Ours also included information about the local gentry, the Dispensary, and anything else the Vicar was involved in or had friends involved in. I am currently transcribing them so we can see the Victorian alterations of our Church ahead of works to repair, all painstakingly detailed in the magazines, as well as cost.

If you are struggling to find that piece of information, it is always worth asking the local records office if they have the Parish Magazines, you never know what it might lead to!

 

Teaching history and Local History Groups

Today’s Seneca and TMHistory Icons was an amazing CPD oppotunity. I was delighted to see so much local history included. What I did find lacking was the mention of local history groups. I am very biased on this. I was building our Heritage Group, as a local historian, long before I was teaching history, it is what lead me into teaching.

I am a firm believer that local history groups should be the first stop for any school history department. They will have their own archive, probably have written about the topics that you are after, as well as able to supply speakers to come and talk to the pupils about their local community, helping with the cultural capital.

I did this a few years ago for our local village school, where I presented to Reception, KS1 and KS2 as part of their history week. Being able to talk about the history of their own locailty in detail gets them absorbed! We then took the local Secondary school history teachers on a walk around the village, with a detailed account of the elements and periods of history that they could cover, just within our village. Luckily for them this included everything from the early Saxons right through to WWII, along with recalcitrant Catholics high up in Henry VIII’s and Elizabeth I’s courts!

A number of groups will also involve archaeology, and there is nothing quite like being able to bring in artefacts from the pupils local surroundings and allowing them to touch history. My Year 7’s spent a part of one of our Norman lessons touching pottery from that period, found just three miles up the road from the school. I have everything from Iron Age flakes to 1980s pottery in our group’s archaeology collection. We are also incredibly lucky to have a reconstructed head from the 1990s programme ‘Meet the Ancestors’. The very first child reconstruction in the world, that of a Saxon child, the same age as most of my pupils. Lots of groups will do outreach projects, or if not point you in the right direction.

One of the questions asked today was about ‘how local is local?’ Eadwine and Morcar rally of the troops, against Tostig’s rule in Northumberland, happened in Northampton, which is 30 miles away, but is included in my teaching as ‘local’. Whilst teaching the Normans in September I heard that our local beacon, 8 miles away, may have been used as part of the beacons during the Norman Conquest, which my pupils loved hearing about so much that they even wrote about it in their assessment piece! I think it is just as important to add in snippets of local history as it is to carry it out as part of a SoW. My Domesday lesson is run on the basis of using information about the local villages. To tell them that a small village 3 miles away, was worth more than the large market town they now go shopping in 1086 completely stumps them! (I shall be exploring this a bit more in another post on using drama in history.)

With archives being run differently after Covid-19, it will be much harder to visit. Ours is only taking advance bookings and you need to know precisely what you want and order before you visit. This takes away the ability to sit there and be guided by the evidence in front of you, and order what you need during your time there. I have gained so much information by starting in one place in the morning, and ending up somewhere I didn’t expect a few hours later.

Local history groups can be a godsend to history departments, and vice versa. Young people engaging with the local history group in their area means that groups are more likely to survive in the future. We are in danger of losing groups, in the future, in certain areas due to the age of most members.

Some groups are not in here, we are not at present, but this is a good starting point, as well as a good old Google search. Good luck!

https://www.balh.org.uk/societies-az

Drama and Music in the History Classroom

Outside of school I co-run a children’s drama group. Drama and music are a great way of teaching as they help engage the pupils in a different way, especially for more complex ideas. I thought I would share some of the ways I use them in the classroom with my Year 7 history class.

Drama

Our first foray into drama was the Battle of Hastings. Half the class as Normans, and the other the Saxons. They can be very dramatic, dying is a particular favourite part of the action! It can help to explain how the Normans went from a virtual stalemate to final victory.

The Domesday book is perfect for role play. I cut out cards with local details on, split the class into the information collectors and those being interviewed. The interviewees are then split into different strands of society. We discuss why some information is missed off and how they might feel about the amount of details being collected. It allows pupils to explore the intricasies of the Domesday Book.

The Feudal System is an important part of the understanding of Medieval history. The pupils voted for the king, who then appointed his knights, and so on. As we carried on through our lessons, each member of the class could play their own role they had been assigned at the start.

The death of Thomas Becket was another firm favourite with the pupils. We started off in the court of Henry II over in France, with the class being a mixture of knights and those in Canterbury Cathedral. Though I am sure Becket probably wasn’t quite as dramatic in death as our’s was, definitely would have given Richard Burton a run for his money! However, they then discuss how both parties might feel, and how it got to the point of murder, allowing further discussion points.

Music

It is really difficult to find music from the Norman period, however, once we head into the Angevin era the music is widely available on YouTube. When we were studying anything to do with the royal court, I always started the lesson with a piece of music from the time, the same with the Church, allowing them to see a contrast between the two. Richard the Lionheart was an excellent musician and songwriter so it is an ideal time to introduce the music of the Crusades. It gives another dimension to the pupils understanding of the Medieval world, as well as showing the similarities between our time and then.

The pupils thoroughly enjoyed these lessons, and talked about them all the time. Lesson retrieval was easier as well, as they could picture in their minds what they had acted out or listened too.

Using the Census Records in Schools

Most people will have thought about census enumerator books with regards to family history. What about the use of them as part of local history? Census records are not just a family history tool but can open up discussions about how and why things were recorded, as well as looking at how the information was gathered. Why did the Victorians want to know so much about everybody? Why do we still use the census today?

Next year will be the release of the 1921 census records, with 2022 predicted as the arrival date on sites such as FindMyPast. This will be the last census to be released that has pre-WWII information as the 1931 census, for England and Wales, was burnt in a mysterious fire in 1942. The census records are not just for those searching for their family, it can shine a light into a world of hidden stories.

I started working with census records in 2018, when I realised that the only way I could write my microhistory for my dissertation was to collate all the information from 1851 to 1901. I learnt quite quickly that it was not a small task. I ended up with thousands of records in an excel spreadsheet, but the detail it allowed me to write about was enormous.

What is the benefit for teaching?

Teaching local history is a difficult task as the stories are not there for the ordinary working people. By looking at census records you can begin to tell stories. The stories I told were of the changes in people’s lives over several census years. I learnt about the changes to our farming community, as well as the fall in cottage industries. I followed the fortunes of people moving in and out of the village. Tracked how they changed their lives from ordinary farm workers to better occupations. I saw how the change in attitude affected the way that women were viewed in the census records.

The Industrial Revolution is considered as such a small time period, but places such as the Home Counties, the South West and the East were very late developers. These proto-industrial areas were just starting to find their feet in the mid to late nineteenth century. We concentrate our teaching on how the Industrial Revolution affected the Empire, communications, and laws. Our rural areas have just as much of a story to tell, as do the growing urban areas, far deeper than can be covered in any textbook.

How to do it.

I spent an hour this afternoon looking at the High Street in one of my microhistory villages, just to see what I could glean from the information. I only looked at 1851 and 1901. I chose the High Street as the name very rarely changes. Other roads often change names, or swap names, as I have found out on numerous occasions!

As all my data is in an excel spreadsheet it takes very little time to actually collate the information required, more time to actually analyse and write it. I am going to write my findings as well as the questions that came to mind whilst I was writing. Some of these were the same questions I asked myself as I wrote my own microhistory, and are excellent jump off points for discussion.

The High Street, Wing.

Housing

In 1851 the population of the High Street totalled 320 people living in 80 houses. This averages out at four people per household. By 1901, the High Street population had dropped to 274 people, however, six more houses had been built, bringing the average household size to just over 3.

Questions to ask would be whether that sounds like it is overcrowded? What I haven’t looked at, and did for my microhistory, was the composition of those households. How many were only made up of single people, couples or family groups? For this village, extended families tended to create a number of overcrowding issues. You can also look at maps to see if there is the possibility of picking up the increase in houses, as in my previous blog post on maps.

Gender and age

In 1851, there were 171 males in the High Street and 149 females. By the time we get to 1901 this has changed considerably. We know there is a population drop-off from 320 to 274, and this shows us why. The change is mainly down to a drop in males. From 171 down to 122 in 1901, with females slightly increased to 152.

Why? What has happened to the male population in the High Street to have a significant drop? Looking at age we see that the issue is in the Under 10s and Over 60s brackets. In 1851, there were 44 male under 10’s living in the High Street, this has dropped to 19 by 1901. We can tell it is an issue because the female numbers have only changed from 37 in 1851 to 38 in 1901. Males are also not living as long as the females. In 1851, there are 22 males over 60 living in the High Street, by 1901 that has dropped to 11. With the females of the same age range, there are 13 in 1851 and 23 by 1901. To get deeper into this you can then look at widows to see if there are more females than males. What is causing females to live longer than males? What are working conditions like? Are they more likely to go into the local Workhouse than females? All of these can be explored.

Movement

For me this was one of the most intriguing parts of my microhistory. I was taught at school that people only moved out of the villages during the Industrial Revolution to find better jobs out of agriculture. When I carried out my study I found this wasn’t the case. For my other subject village, I discovered that people moved into the village from other villages a few miles away, still as agricultural labourers. I have cheated slightly by using Wing for this particular blog as the Rothschild estate played a large part in the increase in movement, but it also made it more obvious when compared to a ‘normal’ village.

In 1851, 56 people in the High Street were not born in Wing, of those the furthest came from 20 miles away. This comprised roughly 18% of the residents. By 1901, this had increased to 23% with the distances travelled far greater, for example, Barrow-In-Furness, the furthest at some 250 miles away.

Why did people migrate into the villages? My study was far more detailed than this. It went into the jobs people moved from, as well as looking at those aged between 5-21, unmarried, who moved out of the village, were they ended up and what occupation they did. It opened up the stories of people’s lives. I particularly like the Rothschild coachman who moved to New York and Paris, before coming to Wing. How do we know? His children were born in those places and recorded in the census records. There were also the stories of betterment. With once agricultural labourers moving out and becoming policemen, one even became the Clerk of a local Union Office. Social mobility was on the rise, something that is sometimes forgotten in our teaching.

Occupations

We tend to think of the High Street as bustling places, but in Victorian times this wasn’t the case. The Wing High Street, in 1851, had 36% working as agricultural labourers and 22% in the straw plait industry. By 1901, 32% of residents worked in agriculture with no straw plaiters at all. In 1851, 57% of the High Street were in employment, the youngest being aged 6, as a straw plaiter. In 1901, this had dropped to 39%, the youngest being 13 and an agricultural labourer. Why did this drop off occur? Was it the straw plaiters? What occupations did women do? Were they different in 1851 to 1901?

By looking at occupations you can see the trends, as well as how women’s role in society changed over the 50 years. The subject of child labour can also be tackled, that it wasn’t just in factories that children worked from a young age. By 1901, the High Street was becoming more recognisable, with hairdressers and grocer shops and that is obvious through the census records and can easily be tracked.

Families

Finally, this is the part that needs more research than just looking at two census records. There are 12 of the same family names recorded in both 1851 and 1901, a lovely topic would be to investigate the families and see how they relate to the two census records. This is something I am in the process of doing, however, my dataset for that goes back to the 1500s with parish records, not just the census information. This is one long-term project which I think will take some years!

Conclusion

I hope that you can see, despite the work being tedious to begin with, it is worthwhile doing a project on the census of a road. There is always your local family history society as they may already have the censuses available in spreadsheet format. I remember thinking that I could never do a project like this myself, but, after a false start, it came so easily and was enjoyable. I am hoping to do this with the Year 8s next year, as part of their Industrial Revolution work, it will add an extra touch as well as further discussion points.

Mapping the local community

There are several ways of engaging students, and the public, in local history. One of the most successful for us as a history group, and one students love, is how the place where they live has changed over time.

Old maps feature quite heavily in our displays. Not only do they show how development has changed the place people live, but it also brings to life how people in the past lived. The National Library of Scotland is the most fantastic resource for old maps. You can track the development of places from the late Victorians to the mid-late twentieth century. I use them all the time, not just for written research, but also when planning or investigating archaeology. They also have some of the original maps of the country.

The other maps, which tell an interesting history, are those of the Enclosures of the late 18th and early 19th century. Local records offices will hold copies of Enclosure records, usually maps and a list of owners. Each one had to go through an Act of Parliament, which is also a major bonus because of the detail held within them.

FindMyPast have the 1939 register, which was taken just before the outbreak of war, and amended for about 20 to 30 years afterwards. This has the 1939 maps attached, and is fascianting for those researching bombed areas. I recently found more about my own London history using this, as my great-grandparents were bombed out of the area around the Welsh Harp. I was able to find the street they lived in, the school my grandma went to and the Welsh Harp pub my great-grandma worked in.

The Genealogist is another resource well worth investment in. They are adding in the Lloyd George 1910 Domesday Survey from across the country. This not only includes a map, but also information regarding each house, and piece of land, recorded on the map. Some of the information includes house plans, size of land and what it was used for. Also, on the site, are the 1841 and 1851 Tithe maps. Like the 1910 Domesday Survey, this also includes owners and tenants details, size of land and what it was used for. Through this I found the pub one of my ancestors owned, which was demolished in the late 1800s, after being taken over by the local Rothschild estate. I always knew roughly where it was, but the Tithe map showed the land that they owned, as well as where the pub was.

The Genealogist is expensive, and the Tithe records needs the full package to access it. Local records offices will hold the hard copies, so it is still possible to gain access to them, when Lockdown is eventually lifted. FindMyPast allows access to the 1939 register through an ordinary subscription. Don’t forget to ask local history groups if they have them. If they are anything like ours, we hold nearly all of those records for our area, and have access to the ones we don’t.

The final map I suggest, is not so much a historical map, but one that shows historical elements in the area. The LiDAR map shows archaeological features hidden from view. This is great if you are in a small town or village. Ridge and furrow can be seen, even in fields that have had the modern plough. Features such as Iron Age round houses and Roman buildings can be seen mixing together. This is a really useful tool if you are teaching about archaeology as it is non-destructive, unlike archaeological excavations.

Local history

I admit it, I am a local historian and a history addict. Always feels good to say it out loud! (I also teach, and I am a mum, but my two boys will tell you I am history obsessed!)

I never planned on being a local historian. I had always wanted to study history and do something with it, but was never quite sure what, teaching was always something I hoped to do. I grew up in a house surrounded by history books, antiques and discussions. The usual trips to castles, museums and stately homes, based on some battle or other. Military history was my passion, no particular era, battles and warfare was the way I thought I would go. My first website was about the Homefront in WWI wingatwar.  I had no idea I would end up doing what I do now.

It all began in a Parish Council meeting in 2011. The Neighbourhood Planning Policy Framework had just been published and we knew our village was at risk of major development. So, we took the decision to protect ourselves. I was in the middle of my history degree, so it fell to me to deal with the heritage and ecology side of things. I had two weeks to prepare a display. There was hardly anything. Old photos in a book published in the 1980s, and some interesting claims. I knew about the Saxon church, and the Saxon burials that had been on Meet the Ancestors, but that is sort of where it stopped. Would people actually be interested anyway? Luckily our Historic Environment Record (HER) were all online and that is where I started. I then had a huge map where I plotted all these wonderful finds and listed buildings, hoping it would grab people’s attention. It did. I spoke almost non-stop for two days. My mind was buzzing and racing all the way through. It seemed clear that people wanted to know about their house, the history, their identity. We needed a history group.

In 2012, with my, also history obsessed friend, Elaine, we decided to do a walk around the village, to find out what people actually knew! One of those walks turned out to be the start of another project, as a voice from behind called out ‘I’m an archaeologist and looking for a community project’ to which I replied ‘I’m training to be a historian and in need of a community archaeologist’. In 2013, our Archaeology Project started, with 46 test pits in the intervening 6 years. In 2014, I became the Project Director. Thousands of finds (sitting in my house), has given the village a true sense of history around it. We even managed to complete our original task and find the location of the elusive Saxon village.

By 2014, we had become so successful we set up a group. I have an amazing committee, a brilliant dig team, made new friends, and found family (but that is another story!).

In those 9 years, I have learnt so much, not just about history, but what local history really means. It is about building a community, giving people a chance to share family stories, encouraging an identity and relationship with where people live. I have lost track of the amount of pub nights, coffee mornings, conferences, displays, talks, walks, though my super secretary and friend, Sally, will have it all minuted!

This lockdown has made me re-evaluate what it really means to be a local historian, it is the people. Countless hours of research means nothing without being able to share it. My favourite part is sharing our material and finds, whether it be in the village or in the next towns and city. Local history isn’t just about one time period either, I find myself in one conversation talking about Saxon burials, turn around to discuss our local WWII RAF base. When I first started I thought I would end up being a ‘Jack of all trades and master of none’, I now know I have to be conversant in all time periods, people want detail. Local history fits into the national picture, and vice versa. Every conversation, display, each talk we have is teaching history, imparting knowledge and helping people understand each other, and themselves, better. I am a local historian, and proud of it.

IMG_2076

Straw Plaiting

In 2019, I wrote my Masters dissertation on the rural economy of two Buckinghamshire villages, Bierton and Wing. It was a mix of economic history and a microhistory of the area. Straw plaiting played a really important part within one of the villages and that was also discussed. I also looked at health and migration, which ties in with straw plaiting and the decline in agriculture. This is the straw plaiting part. I thoroughly enjoyed writing my dissertation!

Men and women of Bierton and Wing were involved in the straw plaiting industry. Straw plaiting could be carried out by children as young as two or three, and it was a popular occupation for women, replacing their work in the fields. Straw plaits were created by plaiting specially cut straw lengths, which were then sold to hatters and turned into straw hats and bonnets. In 1851 the main straw plaiting centres were between St. Albans and Leighton Buzzard. With Wing only three miles from Leighton Buzzard it created good opportunities for the plaiters.

During the eighteenth century straw plaiting had been a good financial supplement to agricultural wages, though this was only possible at certain times of the year due to the nature of the plait work. In Pamela Sharpe’s article on Essex plaiters, the 1834 Poor Law report claimed that it was mainly children and single women who plaited. In Wing, 1851, there were sixty-three plaiters who were married, with seventy-five under the age of ten. In Bierton there were thirteen who were married, with five being recorded as under the age of ten.

Straw Plaiting numbers for the villages of Bierton and Wing, 1851-1901.

Plait schools were recorded in both Bierton and Wing. Although there are no records of the conditions within them, David Thorburn’s study on Plaiting Schools suggests that they were unpleasant with the potential of ‘fifty children ranging from four to fourteen years of age’ being in one room. In 1867, an extension to the 1860 Factory Act was added which stopped children under the age of eight being used in factories. In 1868 Leah Taylor, of Wing, was charged with having children under 8 in her charge, in contravention of the Factory Act. She was reminded of the new rules and just charged costs, on the grounds of ignorance. In March 1869, Bierton was recorded as having two plaiting schools as well as a Dame School. The National Schoolmaster complained that there were less children in attendance in September, mainly due to the plait schools as children were plaiting after the harvest.

In 1870, the Education Act created compulsory education for those aged between five and thirteen years of age. Despite it being compulsory there were still some parents who kept their children at home plaiting, rather than sending them to schools. In 1873 Reuben Syratt and William Cuttler, both of Wing, were sent before the Magistrates for keeping their children at home, plaiting. Rueben claimed that it was too expensive to send his daughter, Emma, to school as well as losing her plait money. The magistrates advised him to send her to school and then plait in her spare time, he was also fined. William had already sent his daughter to school by the time of the hearing, and he was just made to pay costs.

The 1867 Factory and the 1870 Education Act were not the only laws to be broken over straw plaiting. Three Wing plaiters were accused of stealing ninety yards of plait, off the back of a cart belonging to a plait dealer. They had bribed a young girl, who had been left in charge of the cart. The police were notified and they set up a watch at a local dealers in Leighton Buzzard. Ruth and Fanny Bolton, along with Ruth Stevens, were caught and sent to trial. Ruth Bolton was sentenced to two months in Bedford Gaol, Fanny Bolton was given six weeks and Ruth Stevens sentenced to two months hard labour. The plait proved to be an expensive commodity

Most studies place the decline of the straw plait industry during the 1870s, due to cheaper imports and lack of diversity amongst the local plaiters. The decline shows in Bierton between the 1871 and 1881 census records, by 1891 there are no recorded plaiters. However, in Wing, this decline is not complete until the start of the twentieth century. Due to the drastic decline in Buckinghamshire, there was an attempt at a revival of the industry towards the end of the nineteenth century. The decline had been blamed on the depopulation of villages throughout the county, as women and children no longer helped to supplement the household income. Work had to be looked for elsewhere and most villages lost population due to this. However, Bierton and Wing seemed to have survived this drop in population numbers due to the plait decline.

In 1891 Buckinghamshire County Council had been petitioned by a number of notable people, including Leopold de Rothschild, of Wing, concerning the lack of adult education in the county, straw plaiting being one of those. The Technical Education Committee decided to invest £100 for a revival scheme to teach the ‘Brilliance’ plait design and encourage new designs for plaiters. It was decided that this would create a new interest in local plaiting and enable competition with Switzerland and Italy, two of England’s main rivals at the time. Wing was one of the main villages that held these classes as part of the Technical Education that had been set up.

There was some opposition to the teaching of plaiting in special classes, firstly it was argued that girls should be taught ironing and cooking and boys agriculture and horticulture. Secondly, that plaiting was something that could not be taught at a later stage, and the skill could only be taught whilst children were small. However, by the November of 1893 the County Council reported that the revival could be achieved and they considered their £100 well spent. The revival, however, was short-lived and the straw plait industry in Wing had completely died out by the 1911 census. There are village recollections of small straw plaiting groups right up until the mid-twentieth century in Wing, in the same cottage as Leah Taylor’s straw plait school was held in the previous century. The straw plait industry had been vital to the economy of these villages, as shown by the attempt to revive it.

Sharpe, Pamela ,’The Women’s Harvest: Straw-Plaiting and the Representation of Labouring Women’s Employment, c.1793-1885’, Rural History, 5(2)

Thorburn, David, ’Gender, work and schooling in the plait villages’. The Local Historian, Vol. 19 No. 3 (August 1989)

Horn, Pamela, ’Child workers in the pillow lace and straw plait trades of Victorian Buckinghamshire and Bedfordshire.’ The Historical Journal, Vol. XVII 1974