When I was in university, I purposely took a few history courses that were outside of the locations where my experience and background lay - specifically, a history of Islam and a survey history of ancient China up to the Ming dynasty. I was accustomed to getting A's in history because I wrote well and had a lot of background knowledge to bring detail to my essays. It wasn't until I took those two courses (and got B's) that I realized something crucial: I wasn't good at history because I'd studied a lot of history. I was good at history because I'd read a lot of historical fiction, and internalized many of the details. My grade sevens used to draw Quebec City in 1650 with paved roads and cars; I don't think I would ever have done that, because I had read so widely that I knew better long before I would have been taught that in school. But, since a lot less of my reading was set in the Middle East or China, I lacked the background knowledge to get A's in those classes. The A's invariably went to students who were from those backgrounds.