History Myths and Misconceptions of History you Hate

Shipmaster Sane

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 3, 2019
Reaction score
3,347
He was still a preacher
I'm not sure what that has to do with it.


Isn’t it associated with Satanism?
Yeah, which is a hilarious irony. They co-opted a symbol of christian humility because "Hurr it like thing but go backwards, so mean backwards of thing!"

That's the upside-down crucifix.
I mean, both mean the same thing. It's not like they went to Peter and said "We're putting you on the cross" and he said "No no, Crucifix"

The cross is just a lower-rez Crucifix.

Actual Satanism? Not really. Edgy kids who think turning cross upside down is rebellious as hell? Absolutely.
Theres... no difference?

From what I know regarding Satanism, it’s really fucking complicated a religion that values a sort of “freedom” that looks to have frankly weird morals instead of simply Evil is Good and Good is Evil
Which is rather humorous considering the Biblical Satan was a Lawyer, and servant of God.

What better symbol of freedom than a grumpy lawyer.
 

CarlManvers2019

The Greatest Defensive Armor
Joined
Aug 22, 2019
Reaction score
8,709
Location
Philippines
Which is rather humorous considering the Biblical Satan was a Lawyer, and servant of God.

What better symbol of freedom than a grumpy lawyer.
I think this' due to a sort of evolution of thought millennia ago. I mean I don't think I even recall a "Fall" or "War In Heaven" occurring in the Old Testament.
 

Shipmaster Sane

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 3, 2019
Reaction score
3,347
I think this' due to a sort of evolution of thought millennia ago. I mean I don't think I even recall a "Fall" or "War In Heaven" occurring in the Old Testament.
In the original text, Satan is the Prosecuting attorney of heaven, essentially. There are various evil spirits that appear in the bible, and in the middle ages they were all conflated as one big figure, along with satan himself, in popular culture.
 

ShieldWife

Marchioness
Joined
Aug 21, 2019
Reaction score
3,035
The Spanish Civil War is a great example of how left wing narrative uncritically is perpetuated in the United States. The Republic was committing mass atrocities against the Church just like the Mexican Secularists did in the Cristero War. The Nationalists were totally justified and were themselves allied with the Carlists, who practiced a Catholic syndicalism and supported devolved rights. Franco ended up compromising more with his allies than the Spanish Reds did with their’s and that’s part of why he won.
Several years ago I visited Santa Maria de Monserrat, an abbey in the mountains of Spain outside of Barcelona. During the tour, they were talking about the history of the abbey and how they were persecuted by the leftists during the Spanish Civil War, then how some of the same leftists took refuge (after Franco won) in the abbey by asking for sanctuary and they were protected by the same monks they were persecuting. Franco respected the sanctuary as well.

It really made me think how there was a moral difference, a stark difference regarding honor and compassion, between the two sides of that civil war that doesn’t quite match with what we’re told.
 
Last edited:

PsihoKekec

Swashbuckling accountant
Joined
Aug 23, 2019
Reaction score
5,214
Location
Slovenija
That place is beautiful, did you also go up on the hill above the abbey?
As about the honor and compassion, both side were rather deficient in this regard, they both relied on mass terror from day one, and the main reason why Nationalists excecuted more people was because they won. You are right that Republican cause was unduly romanticized from the day one, their crimes whitewashed, but by large the fault is on the side of Nationalists as they publicized their mass murder and mass rape (especially that drunkard de Llano) while Republicans did their best to hide it.
 

Lanmandragon

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 19, 2019
Reaction score
2,756
That Americans were handing out smallpox blankets left and right. There is exceedingly little evidence of this ever happening more than one time by one guy on his own and even less that it even worked and then some British officers discussing trying it.
Pretty sure there was a British officer who did do it. Who was then hung for dishourable conduct. Not tottally sure but I think I read it somewhere.
 

Francis Urquhart

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2019
Reaction score
1,129
IIRC the only actual evidence is that Colonel Henry Bouquet wrote a letter proposing the idea. His commander, Amherst, verbally approved the idea but whether it actually went ahead or not is hypothetical. There's no evidence one way or another. Oddly, the Indians may actually have brought the smallpox epidemic on themselves. In 1757 at the siege of Fort William Henry (in present-day upstate New York), Indians allied with the French ignored the terms of a surrender worked out between the British and the French, broke into the garrison hospital and killed and scalped the patients, some of whom were suffering from smallpox. The blankets and clothing the Indians looted from the patients in the hospital and corpses in the cemetery, carried back to their villages, reportedly touched off a smallpox epidemic.

There's another problem here as well. Prior to vaccination as we understand it, exposure to attenuated smallpox was seen as a viable means of preventing the worst ravages of the disease. The Chinese used the ground-up scabs of smallpox ulcers which the patients inhaled. Reportedly it worked quite well with only one recipient in 30 dying and the rest surviving both the vaccination and any smallpox epidemics. Other cultures used exposure to cowpox (works very well). The British and French used blankets from smallpox victims that had been stored for long periods and then given to children. This also worked, most of the time.

There is a final codicil to the situation. Indians have severely degraded immune systems. It's bad now and it was much worse back then. American Indians were and remain notoriously vulnerable to contagious diseases. Some scientists have theorized that the Asians who migrated over the Bering land bridge millennia ago were exposed to such intense cold that the diseased among them died on the way. Isolation from Eurasia and Africa insulated North and South America from such contagious killers as bubonic and pneumonic plague, smallpox and tuberculosis. Accounts of the era speak of Indians who joined settler communities died of disease with remarkable rapidity. One might suspect they were assisted to do so but there are parallel accounts of settlers who married Indian women only to see their much-loved wives expiring as well. One account speaks of a trader who nursed his desperately-ill Indian wife and, when she died, shot himself so he could return to her. Archaeologists who have examined natural or manmade Indian mummies have discovered that prior to the settler's arrival, Indians suffered from cancer, arthritis and, rarely, tooth decay but not much else.

There is not doubt that the great smallpox epidemic centered in the Mississippi Valley was a humanitarian catastrophe. Huge numbers of Indians died, and along with them went the hope that Western Indians could thrive as farmers. Because the worst-hit tribes were agricultural, the Indians themselves came to view farming as a death trip. That was a cultural catastrophe, a heart-rending tragedy—but it was not premeditated genocide.
 

Tyanna of Pentos

The King's Raven
Super Moderator
Founder
Hetman
Joined
Aug 9, 2019
Reaction score
7,359
Location
The Tower
@Francis Urquhart is correct, we have strong evidence that Native Americans suffered from both Founder Effect (reduced immune system function due to inbreeding from a very small and related initial population) and an almost total absence of disease because of the lack of primates in the New World to be a disease reservoir and its isolation. The fact we are more and more certain that indigenous Americans came by boat just means it is even more likely any diseases burned themselves out. In that sense the New World was a paradise of healthy, tall people with good nutrition. Who were incredibly vulnerable to infectious disease.

The same happened in Polynesia where we have good evidence the population of the Hawaiian Islands was close to a million people before contact. The dying continued non-stop after contact for the entire 19th century.

The Haida had fleets of hundreds of one hundred foot long war canoes, thousands of warriors in the Pacific Northwest, they overwhelmed cannon armed warships, within a decade of several major plagues there were only 10pct or less of their population left alive.

This is why Mestizo populations predominate. Intermarrying conferred enormous advantages tangible within a single lifetime. Indigenous women were perfectly intelligent rational actors who chose white men to guarantee they would have healthy children who would survive the disease environment. This is explicit in 16th century Spanish Mexico, where the total annihilation continued for decades after the conquest by wave after wave of disease and was particularly bad.
 

PsihoKekec

Swashbuckling accountant
Joined
Aug 23, 2019
Reaction score
5,214
Location
Slovenija
Battle of the Bulge, there is a popular misconception that entire line just crumbled in the face of mighty Panzers with only 101st and fuel shortages preventing the Germans from driving all the way to the sea, before Patton and clear weather came to the rescue.

In reality American defending forces fought hard, but were pushed back by enemy superiority as it usually happens during offensives, with the most important action being the defense of Elsenborn ridge.

German strategy didn't rely on capture of American fuel depots, those were seen as welcome bonus, they relied on German final fuel reserves, but had trouble bringing this fuel forth, once the advance began, due to traffic jams, courtesy of poor roads in the region, American demolitions and dogged defense of Elsenborn ridge and Bastonge, not to mention the air interdiction once the skies cleared.

Kampfgruppe Wittman didn't conduct the deepest penetration of allied lines, that feat goes to the 2nd Panzer division of the mundane Wehrmacht, which advanced within the sight of Meuse before being pushed back by American counterattack (with British support).
 

Lanmandragon

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 19, 2019
Reaction score
2,756
I don't know if it counts but it might. One thing that always bothered me coming up in Eastern Martial Arts. Is the level of dismissal of Western arts like boxing and wrestling. So I guess the historical in accuracy is that only eastern arts are "martial arts".
 

Tyanna of Pentos

The King's Raven
Super Moderator
Founder
Hetman
Joined
Aug 9, 2019
Reaction score
7,359
Location
The Tower
I don't know if it counts but it might. One thing that always bothered me coming up in Eastern Martial Arts. Is the level of dismissal of Western arts like boxing and wrestling. So I guess the historical in accuracy is that only eastern arts are "martial arts".
That's especially noteworthy because we have plenty of scientific evidence that punching is by far the most effective hand-to-hand combat tactic for humans.
 

Lanmandragon

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 19, 2019
Reaction score
2,756
That's especially noteworthy because we have plenty of scientific evidence that punching is by far the most effective hand-to-hand combat tactic for humans.
I'd say it's relavent since folks have and do die in the ring. The idea that boxing is less deadly is bunk.
 
Top Bottom