This is an interesting riff on the truthiness of history. Starting with the battle of Agincourt about which historians take disparate views of the facts and then pulling back to ask the larger question of reliability of history in general, Angus leads us to reasses our assumptions about the authority of the written word.
This is an expertly written and endearingly delivered essay. It is multi-layered without being too complex and is entirely entertaining. Angus' articulate style is fun and friendly. He encourages us to think without forcing us to work too hard. Well done!
Review of Agincourt
Gabrielle Dore
Posted on February 06, 2006 at 12:16 PM
Think Ira Glass.
This is an interesting riff on the truthiness of history. Starting with the battle of Agincourt about which historians take disparate views of the facts and then pulling back to ask the larger question of reliability of history in general, Angus leads us to reasses our assumptions about the authority of the written word.
This is an expertly written and endearingly delivered essay. It is multi-layered without being too complex and is entirely entertaining. Angus' articulate style is fun and friendly. He encourages us to think without forcing us to work too hard. Well done!