'What?!' I hear you cry. 'Run this woman out of the History Girls for heresy.'
*Sounds of gathered History Girls organising a posse to chase me out of town* (I would respectfully suggest you pin the sheriff star on Caroline Lawrence as she knows all there is to know about cowboys...)
But hold your horses, my friends, this is not a Michael Gove type argument to strike the subject from the school curriculum. It's really a cheeky way of getting you to read a more serious argument about the mistreatment of history as a means of point scoring, the claim 'we won' or 'it was your fault'.
So both sides won - or lost - depending on your perspective.
It reminded me of how unreliable history becomes when turned into a point scoring exercise. (Let's not even start on the 'who was to blame for WW 1?' discussion). Looking round the world there are so many present day conflicts where a historical tally of grievances is used as justification for current atrocities. Clearly it would be reprehensible to forget, or sweep under the carpet, injustices committed, especially when those affected are still alive, yet there are many cases where the wrongs seem to a third party about equal and still the two sides are only interested in their own points. Would it not be better to use history to understand, rather than score?
So to recast my title in a more honest fashion now I've got you to read to the end: history should not be about point scoring; the best use for it is understanding.