To wonder which ‘history facts’ aren’t true.

[LeslieKnopefan]

I understand that history isn’t always true and the further we go back in time the harder it is know what the truth is and what is simply made up.

However I recently posted that I thought it was true that Marie Antoinette hair turned white overnight after her best friends head was paraded in front of her and that I only realised it wasn’t when I told a mate who pointed out it couldn’t be true.

So which history facts that people think are true are known to be lies?

That Henry viii set up a Protestant Church of England so he could divorce his wife

John Rous changed sides with breath-taking haste after Richard III died. Before then, he was a partisan of the king, then he became a toady of Henry VII.

There are loads of contemporary descriptions of Richard that do not mention his scoliosis. Most mention how slender he was, which was borne out by the discovery of his bones, but the stuff about the uneven shoulders was never mentioned during his lifetime. It all came about after his death when paintings of him were altered. The stuff about which shoulder was higher also changed. Originally, it was said his left shoulder was higher, then it changed to the right shoulder to match the altered paintings. And even if people had noticed something about his scoliosis, he was not a hunchback, which is something entirely different.

I dislike the way history books make you believe that the prosecution of Jews was an invention of the 3rd Reich.
It wasn't, they nearly got away with it because it was common practice throughout Europe for centuries

Maybe so, but not to the extent of extermination camps. Besides, weren't we meant to be doing better than that by the 20th Century?

@Bundlesmaid it was particularly pleasing to see the window from which the defenestration took place when I visited Prague Also inteesting that it wasn’t incredibly high and that the defenestratees apparently landed in a muck heap.

@Bundlesmads even

Henry the VIII was married six times. Legally, he was only married twice
This depends whether you take the Catholic or Protestant viewpoint - Two of his marriages were annulled by the Pope, and two without his permission, so for Catholics it was four valid marriages, and for Protestants two.
He still had six wedding ceremonies, though.

LRD, that’s an incorrect fact I’m afraid. Although the Nazis did make some attempts to hide the holocaust at the very end of the war there were huge amounts of documentary evidence which I’ve posted links to some info about below.

The ‘no paper trail’ myth has it’s roots in Holocaust denial.

www.google.co.uk/amp/m.jpost.com/Jewish-World/Jewish-Features/An-envelope-in-a-vast-Holocaust-archive-starts-the-paper-trail-of-a-lost-life/amp

articles.baltimoresun.com/1997-02-09/news/1997040074_1_jeck-paper-trail-tracing-service

Two of his marriages were annulled by the Pope, and two without his permission, so for Catholics it was four valid marriages, and for Protestants two.
He still had six wedding ceremonies, though.

None of his marriages were annulled by the Pope. The Pope refused to annul his first marriage to Katherine of Aragon so he broke from Rome to form the C of E and give him an annulment and it was irrelevant because he never needed to ask for the Pope’s permission again, the C of E all of them. His marriages to Anne Boleyn and Catherine Howard were annulled before they were executed, and his marriage to Anne of Cleves annulled with her agreement. Legally speaking he was only married to Jane Seymour and Katherine Parr.

The strict RC perspective would have been that he was married once, to Katherine of Aragon. His weddings after that we’re not in the Catholic Church and took place when he was excommunicated so we’re not valid in Catholic Law.

Talking of historiography (sp?) -
When I was a child, growing up near London in the 1970s, from our history lessons I had the distinct impression that the UK (England let's be honest) was the BEST country in the world that had invented nearly everything!
Did anyone else pick that up?
Maybe you were raised in a different country and that was 'the BEST' too?
Yes there was no Irish genocide, it was the fault of those pesky potatoes...

When I was a child, growing up near London in the 1970s, from our history lessons I had the distinct impression that the UK (England let's be honest) was the BEST country in the world that had invented nearly everything!

Nothing new about that - just read Sellar & Yeatman...

which Sellar and Yeatman?
I used to have 'Horse Nonsense' which was hilarious..
they were 'Anglo Irish' weren't they?

I remember my primary school in the 70s getting a new headteacher and suddenly some of the old text books disappeared. Like the geography one about the little boy in Africa living in a grass hut. History I think started with a very stereotypical view of Stone Age people living in caves.

Thank you crunchy

History is written by the winners!

So much American history is embroidered- Thanksgiving is a big one full of myths

@koyaanisqatsi Oops, there I go inventing a lesbian sister for Edward the Confessor! I mean, he did have a sister but her sexual orientation is lost to history...

When I did the historiography module at university I found it far more interesting than I expected. 1066 and All That was pointed out as the absolutely logical conclusion of the classic MacCauleyan version of how history was usually written and taught right up to World War 2, ie as an account of how England and The British Empire were obviously always going to be the rulers of the planet.

Yes, re the scoliosis, Richard III had lateral scoliosis. While that would have altered the shape of his naked torso, it certainly wouldn't have made him a hunchback. That's the case with my back too - although sometimes uncomfortable, it isn't limiting or disabling in any way. At 5ft 8 Richard was average height, even after losing a few inches because of his spine.

Very few people had any idea there was anything up with with spine, and it was only when his dead naked body was seen flung over a horse after Bosworth that it became more common knowledge. That was when the Tudor hunchback myths would have started.

Yes but Little, if Richard was as bad as people say (and there’s no reason to think he wasn’t) it would be pretty stupid to go around saying horrible things about him before his death.

That’s very possible Hester. Perhaps he did hide it until his death. The secret certainly got out a long time ago though.

mighty, it's really not incorrect.Treblinka was ploughed over. You can go there and see what they tried to do.

It's not Holocaust Denial. It is in the testimonies of people who were there.

Syrian army dropped chemical weapons a few miles from the hotel where the UN had just arrived at the invitation of Assad.
Putin poisoned a double agent in the UK a decade after a spy swap and just before Russia's world cup.

My point was having scoliosis didn't make him a "hunchback". It was directed at the people who said he was one after all!

I actually found it really distasteful when Philippa Langley was clearly devastated when she discovered Richard had a spinal curvature and it was caught on camera.

That women & children were in the lifeboats first was a general rule at sea. As the rule that no ship will pass another ship in distress. Usually the nearest one will respond first these days due to the improved communication when sending an S.O.S.

I think most people agree on this thread the “hunchback” description was an exaggeration. Whether people noticed his scoliosis while he was alive is something I don’t think we’ll ever know.

I think for PL it was just the first inkling that perhaps the rumours about him were actually true. Just wait until they finally DNA test the kids bones they found at the Tower. I’d like a close up for that one.

Surely plenty of people at court would have seen Richard's spine and shoulders, as kings didn't dress themselves and had large retinues who would have been with him when he wasn't wearing things like a thick doublet or armour, which would disguise the disfigurement

They just perhaps would have been circumspect about gossiping about such things, given the implications for themselves (and their families) if found to have done so...