Tim og Rebekah introduserte meg nylig til en bok jeg aldri hadde hørt om. Den heter

1066 And All That; A Memorable History of England, comprising all the parts you can remember, including 103 Good Things, 5 Bad Kings and 2 Genuine Dates

og er skrevet av Walter Carruthers Sellar og Robert Julian Yeatman (og illustrert av John Reynolds). Den ble først utgitt i 1931, og erklærer i sin "Compulsory Preface (This Means You)" at

History is now at an end (see p. 113) ; this History is therefore final.

På side 113 får man kapittel LXII, kalt "A Bad Thing":

America was thus clearly top nation, and History came to a .

Første kapittel forteller at

The first date in English History is 55 B.C., in which Julius Cæsar (the memorable Roman Emperor) landed, like all other successful invaders of these islands, at Thanet. This was in the Olden Days, when the Romans were top nation on account of their classical education, etc.

og fortsetter

Julius Cæsar was therefore compelled to invade Britain again the following year (54 B.C., not 56, owing to the peculiar Roman method of counting), and having defeated the Ancient Britions by unfair means, such as battering-rams, tortoises, hippocausts, centipedes, axes and bundles, set the memorable Latin sentence, ``Veni, Vidi Vici,'' which the Romans, who were all very well educated, construed correctly.
...
The Roman Conquest was, however, a Good Thing, since the Britons were only natives at the time.

Nå skal jeg være forsiktig og ikke ende med å sitere hele boken (noe jeg antar ville være en Bad Thing), men de mer utdannede av dere har sikkert allerede gjenkjent den som i noe i retning av Knut Nærums Norsk litteraturhistorie fritt etter hukommelsen (bare 71 år tidligere ute og dermed automatisk mer ærverdig). Jeg tror de aller fleste som fulgte med i historietimen vil sette pris på denne boken (og de som fulgte med i litteratur-undervisning vil kanskje forstå hvorfor man blir fortalt at Macbeth

known as the Bane of Fife, murdered a number of his enemies, including Mac Duff, Lord Dunsinaney, Sleep, etc.

i alle fall når de får tenkt seg om). Mot slutten av hver del får man i tillegg en "test paper" med spørsmål av typen

Which do you consider were the more alike, Cæsar or Pompey, or vice versa? (Be brief.)
og
Discuss, in latin or gothic (but not both, whether the Northumbrian Bishops were more shismatical than the Cumbrian Abbots. (Be bright.)
eller
Which came first, A.D. or B.C.? (Be careful.)
Alt etterfulgt av følgende caveat: "Do not attempt to answer more than one question at a time".

Med hensyn til datoen fremhevet i tittelen, 1066, får vi klargjort følgende:

The Norman Conquest was a Good Thing, as from this time onwards England stopped being conquered and thus was able to become top nation.

Siden jeg bor i Skottland føler jeg at det nesten vil være galt å ikke i tillegg sitere bokens glimrende forklaring på hvordan skottene kunne slå engelskmennene ved Bannockburn:

The causes of the English defeat were all unfair and were:
1. The Pits. Every time the Wallace saw some English Knights charging at him he quickly dug one of these unnatural hazards into which the English Knights, who had been taught to ride straight, galloped with flying colours.
2. Superior numbers of the English (four to one). Accustomed to fight against heavy odds the English were uneasy, and when the Scots were unexpectedly reinforced by a large body of butlers with camp stools the English soldiers mistook them for a fresh army of Englishmen and retreated in disgust.
3. Foul Riding by Scottish Knights. This was typified even before the battle during an exhibition combat between the Bruce and the English Champion, Baron Henry le Bohunk, when Bruce, mounted on a Shetland pony, galloped underneath the Baron and, coming up unexpectedly on the blind side, struck him a foul blow behind and maced him up for life.

Det viser seg også at Hosebåndsordenens motto, Honi soie qui mal y pense, ikke betyr "skam til den som tenker galt om det" eller noe i den dur (slik jeg alltid har trodd), men " Honey, your silk stocking's hanging down". Og det er jo greit å få slikt rettet opp.

Det hele baserer seg i stor grad på ordspill (som når man blir fortalt at "Conditions in France were favourable to Henry since the French King, being mad, had entrusted government of the country to a dolphin"), men intelligente ordspill som krever at man har et visst grep om historie og denslags (det er for eksempel greit å vite at en fransk kronprins vil bli omtalt som "Dauphin").

Det er også greit å vite at

One of the rules in the Wars of the Roses was that nobody was ever really King but that Edmund Mortimer really ought to be

og at Henrik av Navarra uttalte at

Paris is rather a Mess

(Silje vil skjønne hva det refererer til, om ingen andre). Noe senere får vi følgende briljante beskrivelse av resultatet av den amerikanske uavhengighetskrigen

... the Americans, in memory of George III's madness, still refuse to drink tea and go on pouring anything the English send them to drink into Boston Harbour.

After this the Americans made Wittington President and gave up speaking English and become U.S.A. and Columbia and 100%, etc. This was a Good Thing in the end, as it was a cause of the British Empire, but it prevented America from having any more history.

Vi blir også fortalt at Victoria på tross av innsatsen fra sine undersåtter

remained obdurately plural and not amused.

Og at

King Edward's new policy of peace was very successful and culminated in the Great War to End War. This pacific and inevitable struggle ... is the cause of nowadays and the end of History.

Dette briljante stykke historie finnes fortsatt i print og kan fåes tak i blant annet her. Når dere har den i hende enbefaler jeg på det sterkeste at dere legger spesielt merke til kapittel XX, om "Robin Hood and his Merrie Men", for ikke å snakke om den delen av kapittel XXXIV som dreier seg om "Gunpowder Plot" og kapitlene XXXV og XXXVI om Stuart-kongene.

Løp og kjøp!