The majority of secondary schools in the inner London area still offer their pupils what may be described as a ‘traditional’ history course in the lower school. This course begins with cavemen and usually ends with the Hanoverians. Pupils are taught about the “Great Civilisations” of Egypt, Greece and Rome, about the various invaders who came to these Islands such as the Romans, Vikings and Normans. This course is still firmly entrenched in our schools and most history departments in the London area are reluctant to alter their syllabi.

Part of the explanation for this reluctance is resistance by classroom teachers to other areas of study. Mast of our teachers were themselves taught this traditional course and cannot honestly see any reason for changing what they teach. After all, if it was good enough for them why shouldn't it be good enough for their pupils?