Welcome to my blog. The week of 1–7 July 2011, I’m participating with more than two hundred other bloggers in the “Freedom Giveaway Hop,” accessed by clicking on the logo at the left. All blogs in this hop offer book-related giveaways, and we’re all linked, so you can easily hop from one giveaway to another. But here on my blog, I’m posting a week of Relevant History essays, each one with a Revolutionary War theme. To find out how to qualify for the giveaways on my blog, read through each day’s Relevant History post below and follow the directions. Then click on the Freedom Hop logo so you can move along to another blog. Enjoy!
*****
In 1999, I began researching historical background for the manuscript that eventually became the award winning Paper Woman. From the start, I waded in the mist of myth. Every day, I was astounded by the discovery of more examples of propaganda labeled as fact, and men and women who’d been deified. I decided to have a look at the war for myself instead of parroting what I’d learned in history class or absorbed from popular culture.
When I did that, social, religious, and economic systems got turned on their heads. Funny how that happens.
All that mythmaking was bound to occur. We humans have a lusty appetite for good stories. The last eyewitness to the Revolutionary War died in the 1800s. That meant nobody was around to contradict the tweaks we were making to facts, the tall tales we were spinning for posterity. Like the following twaddle:
The Southern colonies were unimportant in the war, and most of the fighting occurred in the Northern colonies.
Women were delicate damsels, expected to concern themselves with bearing and raising children only, considered “improper” if they owned or operated businesses.
Every colonist was either loyal to King George or a patriot.
What you’ll find on my blog this week is not your father’s Revolutionary War. I’ve never written it that way, and I won’t be writing it that way, and my guest authors don’t write it that way. This week, they’ll help me bring you down to earth about this historical free-for-all, show you the reality.
So let’s prime the pump. What “fact” about a past civilization did you learn in history class or popular culture that you later found out was balderdash?
*****
I’m giving away an ebook copy of Paper Woman to someone who contributes a legitimate comment on my blog today or tomorrow. Make sure you provide your email address. I’ll choose the winner from among those who comment on this post by Saturday 2 June at 6 p.m. ET, then publish the name of the winner on my blog the week of 11 July. No eReader required. Multiple file formats are available.
**********
Did you like what you read? Learn about downloads, discounts, and special offers from Relevant History authors and Suzanne Adair. Subscribe to Suzanne’s free newsletter.
Thanks for telling us about this thru the Dorthy L site, I just started reading this and look forward to every day — how very intriguing and really look forward to watching every day! Thanks for an interesting way to learn continously!
Welcome, Lynn. The author lineup for the week is posted here. Enjoy!
One of the first “facts” I remember discovering was not true was that Christopher Columbus and his peers all thought the earth was flat. That still sort of annoys me, but now I wonder if that is just ossified facts that keep getting repeated, and somehow all of the teachers did not show up for the Christopher Columbus part of American History in college?
misstrangelove at gmail dot com
Melora, thanks for visiting. Yes, a lot about Columbus has that sort of mythological feel to it, like the story of George Washington chopping down the cherry tree. Plus historians have uncovered more and more about Columbus recently — information we didn’t have access to when we were growing up.
Textbooks are quickly outdated. Look at the ancient civilization of Sumer. Two generations ago, people didn’t even know of the Sumerians’ existence.
But like you, I wonder why history teachers keep perpetrating gobbledegook as fact. One of my sons told a teacher that Paul Revere never completed his ride. That sure made her angry!
What I’ve found interesting is how some of our historical heroes’ flaws are so entirely ignored when we learn about them in school. As if people like Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin were perfect. History is much for interesting when we are allowed to learn that these people were actually human.
Kari, what you said. One reason we write historicals is to give humanity to these demigods, so folks in the 21st century can touch the past and learn from it. And we so need to learn from the past.
Thanks for stopping by!
“Real” history is so important. We need to know great men and women have warts just like everyone else. And that those imperfections don’t necessarily change the importance of what they do or did. Particularly, in this time of instant and constant communication. And we need to be able to judge which of those warts are important and may affect their judgement and which can be ignored.
A fact that I wasn’t aware of when I majored in history (long ago) was the size of the Native American population before the arrival of the white man and the diseases that literally decimated the tribes.
I think it’s great that you are setting straight some falsehoods from history. I think we have a really bad tendency to put a spin on history, and that’s just wrong. How can we learn from the past if we are not learning the truth? And how can we expect our children, our future generations, to learn? Thanks for that!
Hi Kathy, our school history texts sure downplayed the Europeans’ “gift” to the Native Americans, didn’t they? That was one of the facts about Columbus that wasn’t well publicized until a generation ago. Entire villages were wiped out.
I think I first heard what had happened to the Caribbean natives when I was in college studying Microbiology, and the professors talked about disease resistance and spread. I felt disgusted, betrayed. It’s a lesson humanity definitely needs to learn.
Hi, Julie. Ah, the “truth.” You know the truth changes, depending on who’s telling the story.
And history has so been written by the “victors.”
One of my favorite “truths” is the one that says the Continental Army beat the tar out of the Crown forces, and all the defeated, dispirited, disoriented redcoats returned to Britain with their tails tucked between their legs. Really? Really? If that were the case, a little guy from Corsica would have had no problems taking over the world a few years later. LOL
What “fact” about a past civilization did you learn in history class or popular culture that you later found out was balderdash?
Josephine Tey’s The Daughter of Time has examples of distortion beyond poor Richard III.
I learn ‘new’ history from your blog every time I read it. Gee, and I had my schooling so long ago it was almost current events. tee hee!
Richard III is just one example of a monarch who was treated to a smear campaign by historians, Liz! Would you believe John I, too? John got trashed in favor of his brother, Richard the Lionhearted, and we have an impression of John as an ineffective monarch, simply because he’s the one associated with the Magna Carta. I’m not sure Shakespeare helped the image of either man.
Thanks for stopping by.
Nice to see you here, Norma, and I’m glad you’re enjoying the Relevant History posts. Stick around for the whole week. A fun time will be had by all!
I love history, one of the great things about it is that almost every person has a different view on the subject. Take me as an example: I’m a Georgia Peach, when I was a child they actually taught Georgia history in school, they don’t do that anymore. Anyway, being from Georgia I don’t call the big war The War Between the States or the Cival War, no to be it’s the War of Northern Agression. See different takes on the same subject.
Spot on, Loves to dive, and you must come back for tomorrow’s post. Trust me, you’ll love it.
Posted on behalf of M. E. Kemp:
Hi Suzanne – again I could not access your comment section for what “fact” about the Rev. War turned out to be false. My entry would be about Benedict Arnold, who is so reviled as a traitor that people don’t know he was the real hero of the Battle of Saratoga, the turning point of the War. Arnold came up with his men, although he was relieved of his command, and helped turn the British line to collapse it. He was probably the best general we had and his men adored him. Back-biting and politics enraged him so he never got the recognition he deserved.
Marilyn aka: M. E. Kemp, author: two nosy Puritans series.
An excellent contribution, Marilyn! Arnold did have a huge ego — a politician, ya think?
I believe it was Horatio Gates who got the position that Arnold dearly wanted, and that soured Arnold on the Continentals. Gates went on to lose the Battle of Camden. In fact, when Gates realized how badly Cornwallis was whipping his tail, he hopped on his horse and scrammed, leaving many valiant men like Baron de Kalb to fight to their deaths.
An acquaintance and I once engaged in the “what if” exercise. What if Patrick Ferguson had squeezed the trigger after he’d taken a bead on George Washington at Brandywine, and he’d offed Washington? Who would have become the leader of the Continental Army at that point? Maybe Benedict Arnold? That certainly would have changed the outcome of the war.
Let’s start with George Washington and that cherry tree…