Position:Home>History> I really need help with History!?

your best bet in trying to get an overview on a topic is to use a tertiary source, like a text book!.
tertiary source - "third level sources of history are generalized surveys of a specific subject!. Such sources often include things like textbooks, handbooks, dictionaries, and encyclopedias!. Articles in these may be very accurate, many having been written by specialists!. But only a limited amount of space can be devoted to each topic, so coverage tends to be superficial!.
A tertiary source is often the best place to begin research on a topic!. Since handbook articles often include useful bibliographies, they can show you where to begin looking for useful secondary sources!. And they often describe some of the basic historical controversies, agreements and gaps in knowledge about its subject!.
If you use such a source, be sure to cite it in your notes or bibliography!. Real detail and understanding, however, only comes from looking at secondary sources!."
http://departments!.kings!.edu/history/sou!.!.!.

To keep learning about history, keep doing what you are doing!.!.!.!. read as much as you can on the topic!. I just received my master's degree in history and all i did was read, read, read!. but when you are reading you have to look at the author's footnotes and bibliography!. you have to know where they got their information from!. there are some good books on historiography (the study of the process of studing history)

-
Telling the Truth About History by Joyce Oldham Appleby, Lynn Hunt, and Margaret Jacob

History on Trial: Culture Wars and the Teaching of the Past by Gary Nash, Charlotte Crabtree, and Ross Dunn

History Wars: The Enola Gay and Other Battles for the American Past by Edward T!. Linethal and Tom Engelhardt
-

by the time you are done reading about a certain topic and you get all the facts, you will know how you fell about a certain event or happening in history!. everyone can see different things out of the same event, in history you just need to be able to back up your opinion with evidence!.

sorry, i didn't study british so i am unable to answer the first part of your question but i hope i gave you some answers about how to increase your knowledge of history and historical research!. good luck with your studies and have fun with it, i know i did and i got a great job in the history field!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

---

---

In 1916 David Lloyd George replaced Herbert Asquith as Prime Minister at the head of a coalition government that relied heavily on the support of the Conservative Party!. This resulted in a split in the Liberal Party between the Asquith Liberals or Squiffites and the Lloyd George or Coalition Liberals!. Since the Asquith Liberals controlled the party and its funds, this left the Coalition Liberals in need of money, and the easiest ways of raising money for party funds was to sell honours!.

Now there was nothing new about the practice of selling honours, or indeed of using the funds as a means of party financing!. This had been going on for some time, but by tradition such deals were made with a nod and a wink over a glass of port in the Carlton or Reform clubs!. What distinguished the sale of honours under Lloyd George was the sheer scale of the operation and the brazen manner in which honours were offered for sale!. Ostensibly handled by Lloyd George's Chief Whip Freddy Guest and his press agent William Sutherland, the operation was actually run by a former actor and theatrical impressario by the name of Maundy Gregory!. Gregory had his own offices in Parliament Square and openly touted the sale of honours on official government letters that were sent out boasting of the "exceptional opportunity" on offer!. There was even a published tariff with a knighthood being available for ￡10,000, a baronetcy for ￡30,000, with a peerage title costing upwards of ￡50,000!.

Between December 1916 and July 1922 an astonishing number of 1,500 knighthoods were awarded and Lloyd George similarly bestowed a total of 91 peerage titles within the same period, twice as many as had been created in the previous twenty years!. Indeed Gregory, noting that there were men with cash to spare who couldn't quite afford a knighthood, specifically invented the Order of the British Empire to fill the gap in the market!. As a result 25,000 people were 'given' the OBE over a period of four years and the 'honour' became so rapidly devalued that it was commonly known as the Order of the Bad Egg!.

However not everyone was required to pay, as around fifty or so honours were thrown in the direction of Fleet Street, All the leading newspaper owners such as William Astor (Viscount Astor), Maxwell Aitken (Baron Beaverbrook) Alfred Harmsworth the (Viscount Northcliffe) and his brother Harold Sidney Harmsworth (Viscount Rothermere) found themselves raised to the peerage, thus ensuring that the press were inclined to turn a blind eye to the whole affair!.

It might well be argued that the real issue with Lloyd George's grand sale of honours was that there was no quality control exercised over the applicants, as the only criterion that appeared to matter was the ability to pay!. Indeed Gregory seems to have specifically targeted wealthy but unscrupulous individuals who wished to buy themselves a little respectability!. Thus Richard Williamson, a Glasgow bookmaker with a criminal record acquired a CBE, and Rowland Hodge became a baronet in 1921 despite his prior conviction for hoarding food in 1918!. Many people warned Lloyd George that he was going to far, as the only people receiving honours appeared to be either businessmen or newspapermen!. George V was also known to be unhappy about the whole thing but the only way he could express his displeasure was to delay the granting of the occasional honour to the very worst of the bunch!.

The crunch came with the announcement of the July 1922 honours list!. This included the award of honours to; John Drughorn (convicted in 1915 for trading with the enemy), William Vestey (convicted of tax evasion), and Joseph Robinson (a South African who had only recently been convicted of a ￡500,000 share fraud!.) This was too much for king George who complained that "the Robinson case must be regarded as little less than an insult to Crown and to the House of Lords"!. It was also too much for Fleet Street who despite being the prior recipients of Lloyd George's largesse now turned against him!. It didn't help that the Dukes of Sunderland and Northumberland (both the targets of Lloyd George's earlier attacks) had got hold of one of Gregory's letters and cheerfully read out the contents in the upper House!.

Lloyd George was forced to concede a parliamentary debate on the 17th July 1922!. Speaking in the House of Commons he described the selling of honours as a "discreditable system!. It ought never to have existed!. If it does exist, it ought to be terminated"; and explained that it was the war that was responsible for the high volume of honours awarded under his administration!. Althogh he continued to insist (privately at least) that "the sale of honours is the cleanest way of raising money for a political party", the scale of opposition to the practice in Parliament was such that he was forced to promise reform!.

In the time honoured fashion Lloyd George appointed a Royal Commission to look into the whole matter, but rather craftily ensured that the terms of reference restricted the commission to only making recommendations as to future practice and thus excluded it from examining past conduct!. In this manner Lloyd George managed to avoid any responsibility for the whole scandal, although this did little to arrest the declining fortunes of his government and he resigned in October 1922 and never saw office again!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

---

---