Talk:Peter Heather

Useful article?
Florin Curta, the author, must have worked with Heather on at least one book where Curta was editor and Heather wrong the Afterword. I like this line: "Peter Heather, however, is skeptical about skepticism." --Andrew Lancaster (talk) 13:39, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
 * https://www.academia.edu/41330449/Migrations_in_the_archaeology_of_Eastern_and_Southeastern_Europe_in_the_early_Middle_Ages_some_comments_on_the_current_state_of_research_

Widely accepted
I don't understand how this line "" is supportive by this quotation from the source "", unless British academics are the main people in academia who study the fall of Rome, which I find surprising. Nil Einne (talk) 13:19, 4 March 2020 (UTC)


 * It's because Britain is the new Rome. 2001:171B:2274:2491:DCFA:790F:C978:9E58 (talk) 22:15, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Did away with this nonsense, apparently, it's been here for a while, which I find rather frustrating to be honest. Okay, someone had inserted "British", but there can certainly be no talk of "general acceptance", in Britain or elsewhere, when the following section is literally on "Criticism" (and rather strong contemporary criticism at that). I wish people would learn to read before editing wikipedia, or else stop wilfully misquoting (I suspect it's the latter to be honest) Mike F (talk) 16:56, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

"Definitive narrative"?
Perhaps, by only British academics who 'champion" it, according to the citation, which refers not to Heather's "works" but one particular and unspecified "book." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mystical Realist (talk • contribs) 17:32, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, you're probably right. I edited it to at least say what is in the quotation in order to not start any edit wars, or not be accused of deleting sourced "information", but yeah, I doubt that academics in a highly contested field would use the term "definitive narrative" too often to begin with Mike F (talk) 17:01, 3 May 2022 (UTC)