I am not talking about school or documentaries or anything like that. I was more thinking there is a lot of media that portrays some of the past monarchs in always the same way, e.g. queen Victoria or king Henry VIII. It is not that the people know what they did or who they really were but their images are plastered in a lot of places in ways that others countries do not.
Most have things like statues or that mountain you mention, things that do not represent things like skin tone or hair colour accurately so unless someone differs ethnically a lot from the rest of the population you would never know those details from those kinds of portrayals of their appearance.
You say that like knowing one’s history is a bad thing. I imagine wherever you are from is equally as “obsessed” about its history.
For instance, aren’t Americans taught about their past presidents? And most of them had significantly less impact than most of Britain’s monarchs.
I am not talking about school or documentaries or anything like that. I was more thinking there is a lot of media that portrays some of the past monarchs in always the same way, e.g. queen Victoria or king Henry VIII. It is not that the people know what they did or who they really were but their images are plastered in a lot of places in ways that others countries do not.
Which countries are you culturally aware of enough to know that to be the case?
The US has mount Rushmore and the Licoln Memorial as an example of a counter point.
I think most countries have images of their old leaders in a similar way to how UK has it. But I’m curious to know where this is not true.
Most have things like statues or that mountain you mention, things that do not represent things like skin tone or hair colour accurately so unless someone differs ethnically a lot from the rest of the population you would never know those details from those kinds of portrayals of their appearance.
Source? Sounds like nonsense to me.