Player Agency and Historical Accuracy in Video Games

admin on

I strongly agree with Adam Chapman that the more pertinent question that we should ask is not “is the game historically accurate?” but rather “is the game historically typical?” Player choice inherently nullifies the possibility for perfect historical accuracy as it is impossible to force the player to perfectly recreate events while also maintaining the game’s status as an interactive media form.

Therefore, it is imperative that video games are treated first and foremost as a medium of entertainment. However, their potential as a medium for historical information cannot be denied. The level of immersion that a player can achieve in a video game is unparalleled when compared to other forms of entertainment (e.g. movies, books) and this is entirely due to the level of agency afforded to the player. Even if these games are not totally historically accurate, they can serve as a jumping-off point to get people interested in certain periods of history.

The greatest danger with this approach, however, is the potential for the content of these games to be taken as indisputable fact. The level of dramatization of historical events in as depicted in Assassin’s Creed or Call of Duty is certainly not trivial and gamers need to be aware of this fact. As long as these games are never claiming to be be-all, end-all sources of historical information they still serve the important function of introducing surface-level knowledge of important events and their historical contexts.

Creating Meaningful Engagement with the Past in Video Games

admin on

This is a response to the discussion “Historical Accuracy and Historical Video Games?” on the website Gaming the Past.

Discussion: Historical Accuracy and Historical Video Games? (Part 1)

I thought that many of the issues discussed in this post were thought-provoking. I found the comparison of historical video games to academic history as representations of the past particularly interesting. Understanding the relationship between videogames and the past as one would traditional scholarly history allows us to think about authenticity in video games in ways that we might not consider otherwise. Given that videogames exist primarily as entertainment, historical setting and narratives in video games can seem, in some instances, to be implemented only as a gimmick that draws in more potential consumers. The idea that videogames, like scholarly history, can contribute to our understanding of the past or, as Adam put it, “say something meaningful about the past,” can allow us to more seriously approach video games as a source of historical interpretation.

To continue with the comparison of games and academic history as representations of the past, a game that attempts only to insert a “presentist” narrative into the past, or one in which historical setting is incidental to the narrative of the game or the gameplay itself, can be compared to positivistic history. Much like meaningful textual history, it is important that a game contribute some historical interpretation. This could come in many forms; it might need to, as Jeremiah writes, “offer defensible explanations of historical causes and systems”, or simply offer the player a better understanding of the past and its significance.

Historical Learning through Games

admin on

I take issue with McCall’s statement that “Exploring a historical setting as a fictional character will not help one understand what happened and why.” Perhaps the fictional character fails to add to the historical narrative the game develops, a poorly designed one might even obstruct it, but this model has many merits over the traditional means of teaching history: namely book learning and lecture. To state categorically that an interactive platform will provide no means of understanding history is hyperbolic and obviously false. An interactive experience as simple as walking through a 3D representation of a historically relevant location already provide a unique perspective that, often times, cannot be gained any other way.

Moreover, the “whys” of history–people’s motivations–are much easier to communicate when a person is actively participating in a simulation than when these influences have to be teased out of written documents. A ship’s manifest may have a wealth of information to divulge, but I have certainly had an easier time understanding the necessity of trade when navigating the geopolitics of a game like Civilization. Realizing that my empire is too large to be protected with my meager coffers really drives home the problems that confronted the Roman Empire as it began to crumble

Nevertheless, I do agree that perfect historical accuracy cannot be achieved by video games. Of course, most historians agree that perfect historical accuracy cannot be accomplished in any medium, so perhaps we need not hold games to so high a standard.

Welcome

admin on

Welcome to the course website for Bringing the English Past to Virtual Life (HIST235)!

We will be using this site as the public face of our class, so remember that everything you post here can be read by anyone on the web and should be accessible and interesting to a general audience.

If you’ve never used WordPress before, there are many resources on the web to get you acquainted.  We are using Carleton’s subscription to the edublogs service, and their User Guide is a great place to start.

After you log in, the very first thing you’ll want to learn how to do is publish a new post.

We are looking forward to your contributions this term and can’t wait to see what we collaboratively produce.

Cromwell and the Interregnum

admin on

The English Interregnum lasted from 1649, when Charles I was executed for high treason, until 1660, when Charles II was put on the throne. A lasting affect of the Interregnum was the flourishing of religious dissenters such as Diggers, Ranters, and Quakers. Oliver Cromwell was a very religious man, but he made room for dissenters within England (as long as they weren’t Catholic. He had a particular hatred of Catholics). Some of the legislation passed during the Interregnum had clear religious overtones, such as the Adultery Act, an act that imposed the death penalty for adultery. However, Cromwell’s commitment to liberty of conscience stood in the way of his attempt to form a godly nation. During the Interregnum, the Toleration Act was also passed. This act abolished compulsory church attendance. Also during the Interregnum, Cromwell did not withdraw England from the world stage. Instead he went on the offensive, and conquered Scotland and Ireland. Ireland was dealt with very harshly, Scotland not so much because the Scotland was Protestant. A republic was established during the interregnum, but it did not last. The republic struggled from its early days, however, In fact, in 1657 Cromwell was offered the kingship, which he declined after three months. Oliver Cromwell died in 1658, and without him the republic did not last very long. After a decade of governmental changes, the monarchy was brought back.

Passage of the Settlement Acts at the Restoration

admin on

In 1662 Parliament passed the Poor Relief Act 1662, otherwise known at the Settlement Acts, to deal with the question of where someone was considered “settled.” If a poor person was settled in a parish, that parish (defined as an area with its own priest, each parish collected taxes) was obligated to provide “Poor Relief.”

Here is a list from The Victorian Web which legally made people “settled”:

  • be born into a parish where the parents had a settlement
  • up to 1662, live in a parish for more than three years; after 1662 a person could be removed within 40 days of arrival…
  • be hired continually by a settled resident for more than a year and a day…
  • hold parish office
  • rent property worth more than £10 p.a. OR pay taxes on a property worth more than £10 p.a.
  • have married into the parish
  • previously have received poor relief in that parish
  • have served a full seven-year apprenticeship to a settled resident

After the Settlement Acts, folks only had to live somewhere for 40 days, but during that period they could be removed if any local complained. This encouraged poor folks to move to the areas with the best poor relief. The Poor Relief Act also stated that people could travel to another parish if they had a certificate from the minister of the parish. If they had this certificate and needed poor relief the home parish would pay for their return and poor relief. This Act encouraged poor folks to move, but limited the ability to do so.

Sources:

Bloy, Marjie. “The 1662 Settlement Act.” The Victorian Web. The Victorian Web, 12 Nov. 2002. Web. 11 Jan. 2016 <http://www.victorianweb.org/history/poorlaw/settle.html>.

‘Charles II, 1662: An Act for the better Releife of the Poore of this Kingdom.’ Statutes of the Realm: Volume 5, 1628-80. Ed. John Raithby. s.l: Great Britain Record Commission, 1819. 401-405. British History Online. Web. 11 January 2016. http://www.british-history.ac.uk/statutes-realm/vol5/pp401-405.

“Poor Relief Act 1662.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 16 Jan. 2013. Web. 11 Jan. 2016.

Knatchbull’s “Workhouse Test Act” Is Passed

admin on

An amendment to England’s poor laws was made in 1723 with the passage of Knatchbulls Workhouse Test Act. Knatchbull’s Act mandated that all able-bodied people requesting poor relief were required to enter a workhouse and perform a set amount of work. This piece of legislation was a reaction to a number of concerns surrounding the country’s impoverished population. From the monetary angle, this was seen as a solution to stop parishes from claiming inflated poor rates and to discourage people from requesting poor relief. Additionally, people believed that forcing the poor to work for aid and reside in controlled communities would help instill work ethics, better manners and renewed religious sentiments in them.

At first, the workhouses were received in a relatively positive light, but not everyone continued to support this system. The principal landowner within each parish was responsible for funding the workhouses through the mandatory “Parish Burden” poor relief tax. Although in theory the workhouses were supposed to be self-sustainable and even capable of making a profit, in reality this was not the case. Workhouses proved to be surprisingly expensive due to the high cost of feeding, clothing, and providing shelter for all of the workers, as well as because of the mismanagement and pilfering of funds by those in charge of the institutions. The landowner’s displeasure with these high costs eventually lead to modifications of this system through a new act in 1782, which dictated that the workhouses did not have to house the able-bodied.

Boulton, Jeremy. “Indoors or Outdoors?: Welfare Priorities and Pauper Choices in the Metropolis Under the Old Poor Law, 1718–1824”. Population, Welfare and Economic Change in Britain, 1290-1834. Ed. Chris Briggs, P. M. Kitson, and S. J. Thompson. NED – New edition. Boydell & Brewer, 2014. 153–188. Web.

Maudlin, Daniel. “Habitations of the Labourer: Improvement, Reform and the Neoclassical Cottage in Eighteenth-century Britain”. Journal of Design History 23.1 (2010): 7–20. Web.

“The Foul Disease and the Poor Law: Workhouse Medicine in the Eighteenth Centry.” Venereal Disease, Hospitals and the Urban Poor: London’s “Foul Wards,” 1600-1800. Boydell and Brewer, 2004. 135-80. Web.

William Pitt’s Poor Law Reform Bill

admin on

The Poor Law Bill was proposed by William Pitt the Younger to parliament in 1796. The law was put forth in order to ostensibly aid the plight of the poor citizenry while also quelling concerns of proletariat uprising. The revolution in France worried many, but others were concerned about the effect that the law would have on inflation. The law was based in large part on the Speenhamland System that was being practiced locally across the nation.  The law failed to pass parliament and while the Speenhamland system would persist in certain areas for decades, this failure at a national level would delay other poor law changes until 1834. The proposal also included allowing children to work at the age of five years old with long hours which was controversial at the time leading to the failure of the bill as well.

 

Sources:

Deane, Phyllis, The First Industrial Revolution (Cambridge Press, Cambridge; 1965)

Nicholls and Mackay, A History of the English Poor Law (1899)

 

Gilbert’s Act

admin on

1782 saw the passage of The Poor Relief Act of 1782; it is widely known as Gilbert’s Act after Thomas Gilbert (1720-1798), a political figure who championed its passage. Gilbert’s Act was a reaction to an increase of poor and unemployed paupers, increased food costs, and low wages in England. The legislation was created to enable a parish- township formed through its affiliation with a local parish church- to operate workhouses; multiple parishes can form unions in order to share the financial cost of operating a workhouse. These workhouses were restricted to those who are not able-bodied, such as children, the elderly, and the sick. Able-bodied paupers were not allowed to enter the workhouse and were forced to find employment; nonetheless, they were able to receive outdoor relief if they could not able to find a job or found a job with inadequate income. Parishes gave employers employing the able-bodied paupers allowances in order to provide a subsistence wage and decrease poverty. Gilbert’s Act changed also how workhouses were managed: a member from each parish was elected to be on the Board of Guardians and regulated by the Visitor, an official elected my the magistrate.

This Act became significant regarding outdoor relief and participation of the gentry in poor relief politics. The Act reflected changing opinions towards outdoor relief held by both the government and people, which was motivated by the belief that it is more humane and less expensive than indoor relief. Local gentry were allowed to be members of the Board of Guardians of the workhouse, which made them influential in workhouse managements and regulations.

Sources:

Bloy, Marjie. “Gilbert’s Act (1782.)” Accessed January 10, 2016. http://www.victorianweb.org/history/poorlaw/gilbert.html.

Boyer, George. “English Poor Laws.” Accessed January 10, 2016. https://eh.net/encyclopedia/english-poor-laws/.

Higginbotham, Peter. “The 1782 Poor Relief Act (Gilbert’s Act.)” Accessed January 10, 2016. http://www.workhouses.org.uk/poorlaws/1782intro.shtml.

Higginbotham, Peter. “The History of Poor Law Unions.” Accessed January 10, 2016. http://www.workhouses.org.uk/unions/index.shtml.

Higginbotham, Peter. “The Old Poor Law.” Accessed January 10, 2016. http://www.workhouses.org.uk/poorlaws/oldpoorlaw.shtml#Gilbert.

End of Reign of Queen Mary I “Bloody Mary”

admin on

Queen Mary I, despite the controversial reigns of Empress Matilda and Lady Jane Grey, has long been lauded as the first queen regnant of England. However, being England’s first queen may be the only aspect of her monarchy that she is praised for; following her accession to the throne in October of 1553, Queen Mary began repealing Protestant reforms promoted by her predecessor King Edward VI. Supported by the Heresy Acts, Queen Mary earned her nickname ‘Bloody Mary’ through the execution and immolation of over 250 Protestants on the stake in the span of four years.1 Despite strong discontent from her advisors, and even husband, she continued with the practice until her death in 1558.

During Queen Mary’s time in power, she did little to promote the livelihoods of the vagrants and poor people she ruled. Over her 5 year reign, she produced two poor relief laws: one aimed to provide assistance to the deserving and the other to add structure to poor relief. The first provision required beggars to be licensed if they wanted to beg outside of their parish’s jurisdiction; beggars who could not produce their badge upon request were beaten or lashed. The second provision mandated wealthy parishes to donate to the funds of their less affluent counterparts at a rate ‘according to their ability’. Compared to her predecessors, Queen Mary’s impact on social welfare matters was negligible. Given her deathly strong Catholic convictions, it is surprising that Queen Mary I did little to embrace her religious role as patron to the poor.

 

1 The Heresy Acts outline how to respond to the presence of different, provocative theories that challenge ones own religious beliefs. The original act called for the arrests of heretic preachers.

Sources:

Fideler, Paul A. Social Welfare in Pre-industrial England: The Old Poor Law Tradition. Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006.

“Mary I (r.1553-1558)”. The Official Website of the British Monarchy. British Government, n.d. Web. 10 Jan. 2016.

“Mary I: Queen of England.” Tudor History. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Jan. 2016.