Subscribe to Listverse
I love these little lists of oddities and was thrilled when this one was sent in to me. I have to confess that I didn’t know most of the things on this list. The ones that seem the strangest or most unlikely to me, I verified and found they are, indeed, true! So, onwards, let’s learn some odd facts we didn’t already know.
1. Before the Boston Tea Party, the British actually lowered tea taxes, not raised them.
2. England’s King George I was actually German.
3. Abel Tasman “discovered” Tasmania, New Zealand and Fiji, on his first voyage, but managed to completely miss mainland Australia!
4. Ethnic Irishman Bernardo O’Higgins was the first president of the Republic of Chile.
5. Thomas Jefferson and John Adams both died on the same day – the 50th anniversary of the U.S. Declaration of Independence.
6. When the American Civil War started, Confederate Robert E. Lee owned no slaves. Union general U.S. Grant did.
7. Kaiser Wilhelm II, Tsar Nicholas II and George V were all grandchildren of Queen Victoria.
8. Karl Marx was once a correspondent for the New York Daily Tribune.
9. Josef Stalin once studied to be a priest.
10. Henry Kissinger and Yassir Arafat won the Nobel Peace Prize. Gandhi never did.
11. The Constitution of the Confederate States of America banned the slave trade.
12. The Finnish capital of Helsinki was founded by a Swedish king in 1550.
13. The “D” in D-Day stands for “Day” – “Day-Day”
14. There was a New Australia in Paraguay in the 1890s.
15. A New Orleans man hired a pirate to rescue Napoleon from his prison on St. Helena.
16. Like Dracula (Vlad Tepes), there really was a King Macbeth. He ruled Scotland from 1040 to 1057.
17. In 1839, the U.S. and Canada fought the bloodless “War of Pork and Beans”.
18. Despite the reputation, Mussolini never made the trains run on time.
19. The world powers officially outlawed war under the 1928 Kellogg-Briand Pact.
20. Ancient Egypt produced at least six types of beer. [See them drinking their lovely beer in the picture above.]
Contributor: Tequila Mockingbird
 10 Incredibly Eccentric People |  Top 15 Amazing Coincidences |  Top 10 Failed Apocalyptic Predictions |
 Top 10 Utterly Useless Military Commanders |  Top 10 Evil Scientists |  Another 10 Historical Photographs |
1 Cyn
June 14th, 2008 at 6:44 am
please do not comment about pictures not showing…if you do not see them, obviously there is a problem which J will have to fix when he’s online later. meanwhile..enjoy the text.
2 Navik
June 14th, 2008 at 6:48 am
very interesting stuff, of course Gandhi didn’t deserve the peace prize
3 Domnick
June 14th, 2008 at 6:57 am
yes more trivia to show off to my comerades studying history! thanks listverse!!
4 Ghidoran
June 14th, 2008 at 7:02 am
2. Navik: WHAT!? HOW DARE YOU? Of course Gandhi deserved the Nobel Peace Prize. If you’re being sarcastic, then don’t be, if not, I should wring your head. Yes, your head!
5 Kreachure
June 14th, 2008 at 7:06 am
Wow, really awesome facts! I personally liked # 3, 5, and 7 the best. Crazy stuff!
6 manashiori
June 14th, 2008 at 7:09 am
Wow Navik. That’s pretty harsh. I wonder what’s your logic behind such statement? Care to elaborate or even shed some light? Because just like Ghidoran and many more readers who’d comment, I’m sure they’d be very eager to read your explanation.
7 Marykerbie
June 14th, 2008 at 7:10 am
Clarification on #11 – They banned the importing of slaves from Africa, but the buying/selling of slaves in the US was still going strong.
8 Kreachure
June 14th, 2008 at 7:12 am
Hmm… about #3:
1) It’s Abel Tasman, not Able.
2) Tasman indeed didn’t get to Australia on his first voyage (in which he discovered Tasmania and New Zealand), but he did get to Australia on his second voyage. So, “never noticed Australia” is inaccurate.
9 Josh
June 14th, 2008 at 7:23 am
How funny is it that General Lee owned no slaves, at yet General Grant did! Just further goes to show that the Civil War was NOT fought over slavery! This was an extremely ingenious “call to arms” by President Lincoln, who knew that the French were about to help the Confederates. But, by making this a “holy” war against slavery, Lincoln knew the French couldn’t join in or else appear to be fighting for slavery! Gotta love political spin
10 Mom424
June 14th, 2008 at 7:24 am
Good List!
Navik: And Kissinger and Arafat did deserve it? And why exactly did Ghandi not? Because he liked young women? Because he did little to relieve the pressure of the caste system? Maybe you should outline your reasoning. We’re not mind readers, you know.
11 lost 654
June 14th, 2008 at 7:26 am
you can also put the odd fact that hitler was a dog trainer
12 UndyingOne
June 14th, 2008 at 7:29 am
Because of #4 so many streets, buildings and even stores and restaurants are named O’Higgins
13 UndyingOne
June 14th, 2008 at 7:31 am
lost 654
Hitler was a painter and worked in construction before getting involved in politics.
14 avthedemon
June 14th, 2008 at 7:34 am
gandhi never got nobel because there was no official nomination for him by the indian govt ! Yes this is the truth. Also it doesn’t matters whether he got prize or not, if he was alive he himself would have never accepted it. Such great personalities don’t need any prize. He lives in people’s hearts
15 mecho
June 14th, 2008 at 7:39 am
From what I’ve heard about D-Day, the “D” doesn’t actually stand for anything other than “the” pronounced with a Quebec French accent, making it sound like “de” as in “The Day”. Just thought I’d throw that in there.
16 robneiderman
June 14th, 2008 at 7:50 am
mecho: I’ve heard the D for Day thing numerous times. They also use H-Hour as the hour for an invasion. So that lends some credence to what the list says. Makes you wonder if they get as precise as M-Minute and S-Second.
17 Tempyra
June 14th, 2008 at 7:52 am
Dracula was real? And an Irishman named Bernardo? Cool
18 ringtailroxy
June 14th, 2008 at 7:54 am
I am so sick of people thinking the Civil War was fought “to free the slaves” . Although that was one of the desires of the Union, it was mainly fought because the southern States decided to recede from the United States and wanted to become their own country! It had more to do with the Northern way of life, complete with urbanization of rural areas and the Industrial revolution, encroaching on the antebellum lifestyle of the Southern Gentry with their plantations, agriculture, low education requirements, and it was more a war of human interests than human slavery.
Anytime one person “claims” they are “better” than another, based solely on skin tone, is an abomination. That much is true. But after the Gettysburg Address, and slaves where free, many lacked any skills to survive outside of the plantation life they had always known. since the educating of slaves was against the law, most where illiterate.Sometimes the liberation of a people can have it’s hardships when with freedom comes personal responsibility.
19 miller
June 14th, 2008 at 8:12 am
The Boston Tea Party was all about us not being part of the parliment and charging for stamps, nothing to do with the taxes itself. FYI off of that
20 rushfan
June 14th, 2008 at 8:12 am
Fascinating list, as always. I look forward to looking further into lots of these facts. Especially 11, 17 & 19
21 Harsha
June 14th, 2008 at 10:18 am
No actually the first time he was not selected for the nominations because the british opposed it. The second time when they decided to award him, the jury opposed it because he was already deceased. The Nobel Prize is never awarded posthumously.
22 Mr.Graves
June 14th, 2008 at 10:18 am
The whole ‘Gandhi liked young women’ thing is so tired and boring… and unfactual. People take their own perspective and force it on other culture and space/time locations and have no idea they are imposing their ignorance. Gandhi didn’t ‘like young women’ he got the bad press from jackasses and morons who took the fact that he did the EXACT OPPOSITE- he slept in beds with young women without ever doing anything immoral as a sign of his ability to refrain from the exact thing stupid people try to accuse him of. He did it to prove that he was above temptation- something idiots can’t even fathom themselves.
Any time you hear someone say ‘Gandhi liked young women’ you can rest assured you are dealing with an outright moron who has an agenda of discrediting someone they know they will never live up to, or they are just ignorant of the real facts.
People are so stupid they can completely accept that in Roman times it was totally acceptable to be married and considered and adult man in what we consider our preteen years now, but they can’t make the common leap that lets them understand that that paradigm still exists in places in the world- right or wrong- there are places where a girl is married and a wife at 12 or 13 years old.
Personally I find it disgusting, because of the paradigm I was raised in, but the point is understanding the difference in being raised to see it as commonplace and normal, and being raised to find it reprehensible. AND, for being raised in a culture where it was commonplace- Gandhi actually made a statement with his actions AGAINST taking part in that custom.
Learn your facts, turn off fox news.
23 ringtailroxy
June 14th, 2008 at 10:18 am
Tempyra- yup. there was a real Dracula. But he was no sleep-in-a-coffin-garlic-avoiding-cross-fearing-undead. look up Vlad the Impaler and you will see he was a real ruthless man… violent and cruel… but he did have his villagers in check!
24 Jillo
June 14th, 2008 at 10:18 am
number 1 is not true. After the several acts by the british constitution, pounding the colonies for taxes, they boycotted buying tea. which caused the british based East Indian Trade Company to go nearly bankrupt. so Britain decided to stop the taxes for that british company. but that just pissed the colonies off more, because they past legislation to help a large company stop from going under, not with the colonies in mind. so when they lowered the taxes for the tea for that company it was too little too late. the Boston tea party was about representation in congress. not about the price of tea.
25 Ro
June 14th, 2008 at 11:10 am
#6 is a killa fact. Love it TM.
26 Ro
June 14th, 2008 at 11:17 am
Holy ****, Gandhi sure had some resistance to temptation.
27 Shadow
June 14th, 2008 at 11:20 am
Tempyra: There are those who claim that the character of “Dracula” from Bram Stoker’s novel was loosely based on the historical figure of Count Vlad Dracul. There is some heresay evidence which supports this, but the truth likely died with Stoker.
Ringtailroxy: You said it all when you mentioned illiteracy. By the way, it was the Southern states’ attempt to “secede”, not recede, which was the issue of the war. One is a socio-political act, the other is strictly geological.
Number seven is interesting to me, since if you study the origins of some of the ruling families, you’ll find that none of them originated from the countries they ruled. This is most obvious in Russia, where the current ruling class all hail from other countries. The Bolshevik Revolution was never about the people. It was about siezing the reigns of power from the rightful rulers.
Number eleven is incredible to me! That this is never taught in public school is a shame.
Number twenty, oh where to start! I really do need to go read up on this one.
Great list Tequila Mockingbird. I look forward to your next one.
28 sidvish
June 14th, 2008 at 11:26 am
Navik: agree with you. Ghidoran: tsk tsk.
29 Shadow
June 14th, 2008 at 11:27 am
If we’re going to build glass houses over the implications of pedophilia, we should not overlook any of the accusations.
The Islamic prophet Muhammad(sp?), is alleged to have married a twelve or thirteen year old girl who was a gift from an adherent. Jesus Christ is alleged to have fathered children with Mary Magdelene. The list can go on, I haven’t even started in on the Roman Catholic popes yet; should? Don’t throw stones at someone else unless you can catch the ones hurled back at you.
Mr. Graves is exactly right all the way.
30 Alicia
June 14th, 2008 at 11:36 am
Eh I think a lot of these are pretty much common knowledge.
31 Navik
June 14th, 2008 at 11:39 am
eh sorry guys, sarcasm aint what it used to be, Gandhi was a badass
32 Nelia
June 14th, 2008 at 11:45 am
Interesting list, and interesting comments. It seems like this list could be improved by some clarifications though.
33 Q
June 14th, 2008 at 11:49 am
It was called the Pig War actually.
34 munro
June 14th, 2008 at 11:51 am
I agree that Gandhi did not deserve the Nobel Peace Prize. Not just to be the devil’s advocate but as much good as Gandhi achieved he also indirectly caused a lot of violence. He was the poster boy of protests in India and could be blamed for a lot of the deaths attributed to the British (defending themselves from violent protesters). He will always be in people’s hearts but you have to take into consideration that he caused a revolution (leading to deaths of the people)
Not looking for an argument. Just throwing out a fact.
35 Foxy
June 14th, 2008 at 11:55 am
Answer for Tempyra: Yes, Dracula did exist, so to speak… It is actually a nickname attributed to a Romanian prince who ruled in the 15th century in Valachia (or what is today the Southern part of Romania). His historic name is Vlad the Impaler (or Tzepesh for all you Romanophones out there) and he was quite an authoritary ruler (bit of an understatement there
).
Anyway, he made history for his habit of impaling his enemies and all those who were accused of breaking the law (what can I say? there was no separation of powers in the Middle Ages).
The vampire thing came along with Bram Stoker’s novel.
Our history books actually present him as a hero and in literature he is seen as a symbol of incorruptibility.
Interesting historic facts you didn’t know: Dracula had nothing at all to do with Transylvania. This is another Romanian region which was under Hungarian rule at the time. There was some riff-raff going on with the Hungarian king… well, let’s just say that Vlad felt so welcome in Budapest, he couldn’t leave for 14 years
Oh, and impaling was actually a Polish custom. Very war-like these Polish back in the days…
The Hungarian king contemporary to Vlad was named Matias Corvinus (Matei Corvin) and is reveered as the greatest Hungarian king in history (he brought Renaissance to Hungary). His daddy was Romanian.
36 Foxy
June 14th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
Great list! Had to say it!
Speaking of Mussolini and Stalin: the former was actually training to be an elementary school teacher.
I might be wrong (it’s been a long time since I’ve read on the topic), but I think Hitler wanted to be an architect. He is rumoured to have been quite the shy fellow actually, his speeches came after a few beers.
37 WarningDontReadThis
June 14th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
Great list! I actually knew 5,9 and 18 but the rest I’m pleased to say I just learned. Good job Tequila Mockingbird!
38 WarningDontReadThis
June 14th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
Hitler used to make postcards which he sold back when he lived in Vienna.
39 avthedemon
June 14th, 2008 at 12:16 pm
as someone posted above that gandhi was cause of violence, it is a very shocking reply. He in his whole life advocated non violence and that person is accusing him. You didn’t counted what atrocities did the british on indians. His nobel prize became a very political matter, and britain never wanted he to have it, that’s why he didn’t.
40 playyahplay
June 14th, 2008 at 12:29 pm
i thought we seceded not receded……whatever
41 MPW
June 14th, 2008 at 12:31 pm
the first one is unbelievable. “How dare you lower the tax, what are you mad”
interesting fact, i was born on the anniversary of the Boston Tea Party
42 YogiBarrister
June 14th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
Cyn, thanks. I was wondering why there is a little red x where the pictures should be.
43 MPW
June 14th, 2008 at 12:50 pm
i heard that Hitler wanted to be an artist but he was denied by a prestigious Art School in Italy more than once.
Maybe if they would have just accepted him and let him paint he would have kept his horrible ideas to himself
44 WarningDontReadThis
June 14th, 2008 at 12:54 pm
MPW: You’re right, but I wasn’t in Italy I think it was in Austria.
45 WarningDontReadThis
June 14th, 2008 at 2:57 pm
Jfrater / Cyn: What the hell is happening to listverse?
46 jfrater
June 14th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
WarningDontReadThis: it is a glitch with the new servers – hopefully it is now fixed.
47 jfrater
June 14th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
I have fixed the images and added a couple of clarifications to the text
48 116880
June 14th, 2008 at 3:13 pm
Wow, I did not know that they lowered the taxes when the Boston Tea Party happened…. Those colonists sure were Bitchy
49 Kreachure
June 14th, 2008 at 3:18 pm
jfrater: Thanks you for fixing #3, but I think it lost its punch! It would have been better if you had corrected as “During his first voyage, Abel… but he completely missed Australia!” or something along those lines. Sorry I’m being so demanding. Now I feel guilty…
50 JB
June 14th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
Decreased taxes caused a bunch of Yankees to dress up like Indians and dump the tea into the harbor?
Word might have got out a little late…
We Bostonians are just a bunch of crazies.
51 Sharki
June 14th, 2008 at 3:23 pm
Shadow – The Confederacy’s banning of the slave trade was an empty gesture. The importation of slaves had ended long before the Civil War.
And while it is true that the Union wasn’t really fighting to free the slaves, the Confederacy was fighting to keep them. The southern states needed slavery to stay economically competitive with the north. The south did not fight for some grandiose ideal of limited government or independence from Washington D.C. They fought for the right to keep African-Americans in bondage.
From the Corner Stone speech by Alexander Stephens, Confederate VP:
“The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution — African slavery as it exists amongst us — the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the “rock upon which the old Union would split.” He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact. But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted.
Stephens went on to say
(Jefferson’s) ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. … Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner–stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery — subordination to the superior race — is his natural and normal condition.”
52 jfrater
June 14th, 2008 at 3:29 pm
kreachure: your wish is my command – I have edited Australia.
53 goof_ball
June 14th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
i never knew #13. i thought it stood for something else.
54 Foxy
June 14th, 2008 at 3:45 pm
OOOOO! Thank you for the link there! I’m impressed!
55 stormy617
June 14th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
The “War of Pork and Beans” that is hilarious. I will never be able to look at a can of pork and beans with out laughing again!!
I wonder why they called it that, I looked it up and found that it was about a boundary issue but I found no reference to why it was called the war of pork and beans.
56 Csimmons
June 14th, 2008 at 4:37 pm
Awesome List! this is by far one of the most interesting in a while! and “the Wat of Pork and Beans” sounds like a debate over Weezer’s new song!
57 Kreachure
June 14th, 2008 at 4:43 pm
jfrater: Wow. Thanks for that! Just trying to help!
58 Kreachure
June 14th, 2008 at 4:43 pm
Csimmons: Hehe, I knew I couldn’t be the only one who thought of Weezer after reading 17!
59 Schiesl
June 14th, 2008 at 4:56 pm
for all the Big-ten people, there was acutally a bloodless war versus Michigan and Ohio in the 1830′s. It’s called the Toledo War, it was a boundry dispute the OHIO won. I always just found this funny.
60 Schiesl
June 14th, 2008 at 4:57 pm
The war continues to today…between the Wolverines and the Buckeys
61 stormy617
June 14th, 2008 at 5:03 pm
Yea and the Wolverines RULE!!! LOL
62 Csimmons
June 14th, 2008 at 5:04 pm
Schiesl: yes, and also comes some very annoying arguments, the worst part of the war
63 FelixMG
June 14th, 2008 at 6:24 pm
Excellent list! Although the REAL oddity is that we don’t know most of these.
64 CP
June 14th, 2008 at 6:45 pm
13. The “D” in D-Day stands for “Day” – “Day-Day”
Not true.
In military terms they used D just because they can. It stands for nothing.
Or so I’ve heard
65 TTFK
June 14th, 2008 at 7:07 pm
#11 is a carefully-worded fallacy. They only banned the IMPORTATION of ‘Negros of the African American type’, not all slave trading. As well, the practice of slave ownership itself was AFFIRMED by their Constitution:
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/csa/csa.htm
Article IV
Sec. 2.
(I) The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States; and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any State of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property; and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired.
(3) No slave or other person held to service or labor in any State or Territory of the Confederate States, under the laws thereof, escaping or lawfully carried into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor; but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such slave belongs,. or to whom such service or labor may be due.
Sec 3.
(3) The Confederate States may acquire new territory; and Congress shall have power to legislate and provide governments for the inhabitants of all territory belonging to the Confederate States, lying without the limits of the several Sates; and may permit them, at such times, and in such manner as it may by law provide, to form States to be admitted into the Confederacy. In all such territory the institution of negro slavery, as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected be Congress and by the Territorial government; and the inhabitants of the several Confederate States and Territories shall have the right to take to such Territory any slaves lawfully held by them in any of the States or Territories of the Confederate States.
66 Vera Lynn
June 14th, 2008 at 7:24 pm
Stalin was studying to be a priest??? How much is wrong with that?! How many people died under his regime. Millions. Forced starvation and work camps. I could go on forever, like Randall. I don’t type as quickly, however.
67 Vera Lynn
June 14th, 2008 at 7:28 pm
I read a very icky bizarre thing about Stalin. His body was in a clear sarcophagus, and mushrooms would grow on him. That always creeped me out. Bad enough being dead and on display. Worse to have fungus growing on you.
68 Vera Lynn
June 14th, 2008 at 7:46 pm
MPW #43 Didn’t someone on a different list say Hitler used to draw Disney characters. Along with the fact that Walt Disney was anti-semetic, it makes sense.
Hi how are you tonight? Cubs won. How about the Angels. It will be crazy if they meet in the play-offs.
69 Gord in Canada
June 14th, 2008 at 8:23 pm
a great list again…a possible addition is the fact that Abraham Lincoln and Charles Darwin…both liberators in different ways and giants of the 19C…were both born on the same day: February 12, 1809.
70 MPW
June 14th, 2008 at 8:31 pm
Vera, yep, and boy were those paintings hilarious.
angels are trailing 3-6 in the eighth:(
if they were to meet in the playoffs it would have to be in the WS because of the different leagues
71 MPW
June 14th, 2008 at 8:33 pm
today priests are feared and i think you all know why
72 deepthinker
June 14th, 2008 at 8:58 pm
History is so rad.
73 MPW
June 14th, 2008 at 9:03 pm
that was deep deepthinker:)
74 walter
June 14th, 2008 at 9:18 pm
sorry, you’re all wrong. i have it on good authority that hitler was a bag-boy at the costco on sauerbruchw ste.in berlin, right next to der waffle haus.
75 MPW
June 14th, 2008 at 9:31 pm
are you sure it wasnt der wienersnitschel
76 Crimanon
June 14th, 2008 at 9:53 pm
Damn everyone beat me to Vlads facts! If you’re looking for lessons on mental warfare he is the guy you want to study.
77 MPW
June 14th, 2008 at 10:49 pm
tell us more please:)
78 Avi
June 14th, 2008 at 11:49 pm
btw kissinger did plenty to earn that prize. you are saying that in a bad way. arafat was still trash though.
79 Tempyra
June 15th, 2008 at 12:09 am
ringtailroxy, shadow, & roxy – For some reason I always just assumed Dracula was based on a Romanian myth/legend/folklore, not an actual person. I looked at Vlad the Impaler’s page on Wikipedia… he must’ve been a charming overlord. Kinda cool that the Romanian word for the Devil (Dracul) is related to the Latin word for dragon (draco).
80 smartypants
June 15th, 2008 at 12:43 am
GAY!! this shit is sooooooooooooooooo photoshopped! and ghandi didn’t deserve shit! he was a self riteous pretentious bastard who reveled in his false acclaim!! only in AMERIKKKA!! FIIIIIIIIIIIIIIRST!!!
81 Butterfish
June 15th, 2008 at 12:50 am
One version of events I read about the Boston Tea Party was that the event was instigated by tea smugglers who were annoyed that their livelihoods were going to be ruined by the lower tax on tea. The idea that the colonies should be represented in parliament in London was ridiculous by the standards of the time. This was the era of rotten boroughs, where Old Salem (population 7) had two MPs and Manchester (population several tens of thousands) had no MP. It wasn’t until the Reform Act in 1832 that some sort of true representation was established in Britain, by which time the colonies had gone their own way.
82 astraya
June 15th, 2008 at 1:19 am
Tasman wasn’t Able?
83 help556
June 15th, 2008 at 1:37 am
Ghandi was a racist small minded opportunist.
He defiantly NOT deserve the NPP. Whilst in South Africa he campaigned to sit in ‘ White Coaches’ on the trains because he did not want to sit with lower caste Indians. As for the Africans –well he wrote some shocking things about them.
No –the myth around Ghandi is just that –a myth. he was no more enlightened than any other chancer politician.
84 Denzell
June 15th, 2008 at 3:07 am
I don’t think it’s odd that Josef Stalin, an evil man, studied to be a priest because religion is EVIL. It brings people apart. I once thought that religion is good because it teaches values, but it doesn’t. It is a major cause of all the problems we now have in the world. Think about it.
85 shooter3457
June 15th, 2008 at 3:58 am
Nicholas II wasn’t Queen Victoria’s grandchild, his wife was.
I’m tired of all these lists with incorrect facts
86 Spart
June 15th, 2008 at 4:15 am
Historical oddity that not many people know?
New Zealand was once ruled by Australia.
True story.
87 Tempyra
June 15th, 2008 at 4:42 am
NZ ruled by Australia?! Details please?
88 Tempyra
June 15th, 2008 at 5:09 am
Since no details were forthcoming I looked it up myself. New Zealand was once briefly (as a technicality, if you could consider NZ to be ‘adjacent’ to the east coast of Australia) part of the colony of New South Wales. That was before the modern definitions of “Australia” and “New Zealand” as countries even existed. I call bullsh*t on that idea… no-one get me started on the possibility of NZ becoming the seventh state of Australia either!!
89 astraya
June 15th, 2008 at 5:13 am
Spart – NZ was a separate British colony which didn’t join with Australia when Australia federated in 1901. Unless you know something different. I wait with Tempyra to hear your details.
90 caboose
June 15th, 2008 at 5:28 am
I was under the impression D-Day meant “Day of Days”
91 WarningDontReadThis
June 15th, 2008 at 6:20 am
Whatever the ‘D’ in D-Day meant, they sure kicked ass.
92 Foxy
June 15th, 2008 at 8:33 am
On the Stalin thing – don’t make it a religion issue please! He only went to the seminar because his mother made him. Some things are simpler than they appear. He joined the Communists after he escaped because well… he didn’t want to be a priest. Even HE knew it didn’t suit him.
Priesthood was kind of a prestigious and prosperous business in those days, the Orthodox Church being very wealthy and people being genrally uneducated and gullable.
93 WarningDontReadThis
June 15th, 2008 at 8:43 am
Foxy is right, Stalin wasn’t Christian.
94 Evan
June 15th, 2008 at 9:47 am
So Thomas Jefferson and John Adams did both die on March 4th, however it was 8 years apart. The fact listed above is not true.
95 tim
June 15th, 2008 at 10:54 am
these are kool facts
96 factchecker
June 15th, 2008 at 11:40 am
John Adams and Thomas Jefferson both died on July 4, 1826.
97 kittym
June 15th, 2008 at 12:25 pm
Evan: They both ended their terms as president on March 4th, eight years apart. They died on July 4th, 1826. The fact is true.
98 Viskari
June 15th, 2008 at 1:55 pm
I wouldn’t regard number 12 as an oddity, considering the fact that the area that now constitutes Finland was under Swedish rule at the time. New York was founded by the Dutch but we don’t see that on the list.
99 dick shoes
June 15th, 2008 at 1:55 pm
Mr.Graves:
I think YOU need to get your facts straight with Ghandi. Yes he slept with naked girls, some as young as 9. Both naked. you think it’s cool cause he wanted to “prove he wasnt tempted” ok you think that’s cool lets let ur 9 year old sleep naked with him since u think it’s rad.
He’s also a racist, and published articles against blacks calling them all sorts of terrible things.
He was obcessed with giving people and children enemas. Yes enemas. he was crazy about peoples shitting patterns.
He’s a fucking whack job just like all the rest of them.
Mother Theresa, Ghandi, dali lama,
all fucking nuts.
check ur facts scooter
100 vindician
June 15th, 2008 at 2:04 pm
Help 556
I think the fact about Gandhi was more to illustrate how messed up it is that a terrorist and a war monger got the NPP, but a person who built his whole campaign for the liberation of his country on non-violence didn’t.
Try to keep your eye on the ball, my friend.
101 miranda
June 15th, 2008 at 3:28 pm
Actually the “D” in D-day stands for Doom’s Day
at least thats what ive been told
102 astraya
June 15th, 2008 at 4:18 pm
The Macquarie Dictionary defines “adjacent” as “lying near, close or contiguous; adjoining; neighbouring”. The only one of those that might apply is “neighbouring”. New Zealand may have been contiguous once, but has receded since then. (See comment 18.)
103 TerranRich
June 15th, 2008 at 6:11 pm
Um yeah… I don’t know about half of these “facts”. Whenever there is a list of “facts you didn’t know”, half of them end up being inaccurate or downright false.
For example, a Google search of the phrase “War of Pork and Beans” turns up ONE result: this very page.
Also, the “D” in Day doesn’t really stand for anything. It comes from the terms D-Day and H-Hour used by the military. There have been countless “D-Day”s, but the one we know in 1944 is the most popular and known as such.
104 Moi Two
June 15th, 2008 at 8:36 pm
The Boston Tea Party didn’t have much to do with taxes or smuggling. It occurred because the British govt. made the British East India Trading Co. the sole legitimate importer of tea to the American colonies. Previously, colonial merchants (John Hancock among them) could buy tea and bring it to America themselves. While the event was related to the growing discontent that many average citizens had toward the British, it was directly instigated by those merchants (John Hancock among them) who stood to lose money to the new monopoly.
105 Plasma Twa 2
June 15th, 2008 at 10:49 pm
Another random Mussolini fact: Mussolini did not like Hitler when they first met.
106 Mark
June 15th, 2008 at 11:09 pm
The article is very informative. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to read it.
107 avthedemon
June 16th, 2008 at 12:14 am
the people who posted their views about gandhi must be insane. Such people throw their parents out of home when they get old, say “who the bastard are you”. If you don’t have enough knowledge about anything, then why post here? Silly shit people
108 Spart
June 16th, 2008 at 2:27 am
Tempyra – it was partly a stir. The Governor of New South Wales (a state of Australia) was originally charged by the English Parliament with the responsiblity for upholding Englands laws in New Zealand as well.
The Governor generally upheld English laws of the day, and wasn’t a ruler in his own right, however, given oversight was 3 months away by sea, he held a lot of power.
New Zealand eventually had its own Governor appointed, and no Astraya, it did not federate with Australia in 1901.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Another historical oddity that a lot of people dont know?
New Zealand was the first country to give women the vote
109 uvberot
June 16th, 2008 at 2:28 am
what the heck is wrong with dick shoes, apart from his name?
110 vindician
June 16th, 2008 at 2:39 am
Avthedemon
What is your problem exactly?
111 jfrater
June 16th, 2008 at 4:13 am
Spart: You are right that NZ was briefly a part of New South Wales – but as was pointed out by someone else – at the time NZ and Australia were not “countries” per se. It was only considered part of NSW briefly during 1840 – the year that New Zealand became a Dominion.
Additionally, while I wish it were true (being a kiwi and all), New Zealand was actually not the first nation to grant universal suffrage – it was the first MAJOR nation to do so (in 1893) – but a number of small nations had done so earlier. Countries that beat NZ to it were: Principality of Liège (1792) and Tavolara (1886).
112 Tempyra
June 16th, 2008 at 4:15 am
Spart – haha, well, I took the bait
. I may live in Australia but I’m Kiwi to the core. Can’t wait til I can move back there!
I did think though, that in 1840 or whenever NZ was ‘adjacent’ to the coast of New South Wales that “New South Wales” constituted a much larger part of Australia than it does now and wasn’t actually a state at the time? That in 1840 Australia = New South Wales?
113 jfrater
June 16th, 2008 at 4:19 am
TerranRich (#103): also known as the Aroostook War. 38 incidental casualties. Between the US and Great Britain (owners of Canada at the time) over borders. And, according to the Oxford Dictionary:
114 jfrater
June 16th, 2008 at 4:20 am
Tempyra: you are right – NSW was much much larger at the time and I believe that Australia was not unified as a single nation until later.
115 Tempyra
June 16th, 2008 at 4:42 am
I consider my argument validated now
116 Bob
June 16th, 2008 at 7:20 am
Good list. Not sure why Macbeth is a historical oddity, though, as a large portion of Shakespeare’s plots came from actualy historical events/figures. See King Lear, for example.
117 felix
June 16th, 2008 at 7:41 am
Bernardo O’Higgins was not the first president of chile, was the first “supreme director”, the title that was given before the constitution (and the figure of president) was stated on this country
118 TerranRich
June 16th, 2008 at 8:25 am
jfrater: Ah, thanks for that info. But even still, the Aroostook War was not between US and Canada. I don’t believe the two have ever had a full-out war.
I just get very skeptical when I see a list of 20 or more facts with no sources cited. It just screams hoax/misinformation to me. Like the whole horse statue thing, where people thought the number of legs off the ground meant something regarding deaths of soldiers.
119 Iain
June 16th, 2008 at 8:34 am
Bob 116)- King Lear is not a historical figure- a lot of history and legends are kind of intermingled in the sources of Shakespeare’s day. Best guesses seem to be Lear is a retelling of Lir the Celtic sea god.
120 Iain
June 16th, 2008 at 8:40 am
Talking of Kings – number 2 on the list (George 1 was German) is not that odd. The very nature of dynastic relations and politics means that history is littered with non-native monarchs. In some cases newly created/independant nations would head-hunt a suitable king – it’s how Greece ended with a Danish royal family (the Duke of Edinburgh’s lot).
121 Bob
June 16th, 2008 at 8:56 am
Ack! My mistake, Iain. I thought that was one of the bits in Geoffrey that were actually historical.
122 astraya
June 16th, 2008 at 4:46 pm
Well stone the crows!
According to the fount-of-all-knowledge-pedia:
“New Zealand was part of New South Wales from 1788 until 1840 when it was proclaimed as a separate colony. [nb a colony - not a dominion, which came later]
New South Wales, according to Arthur Phillip’s amended Commission dated 25 April 1787, includes “all the islands adjacent in the Pacific Ocean” and running westward to the 135th meridian. These islands included the current islands of New Zealand, which was administered as part of New South Wales.”
It still relies on the definition of “adjacent”.
123 STLMO
June 17th, 2008 at 10:30 am
The information abouit Grant owning slaves when the Civil War began is incorrect. The truth:
MARCH 29, 1859. Despite the financial troubles of the Grant family, there was one remedy Grant refused to consider. He set free his slave, William Jones, who had come to him through his wife’s family. Source: Document in Missouri Historical Society. http://twister.lib.siu.edu/projects/usgrant/hist/chronology2.htm
124 STLMO
June 17th, 2008 at 10:30 am
I meant to write “somewhat incorrect”
125 STLMO
June 17th, 2008 at 10:43 am
Augh! Keep hitting submit too soon. Julia Dent Grant’s father was a slave owner.
However, Robert E. Lee was in fact a slave owner. Or, more correctly, his wife’s family were slave owners, and while Lee did detest slavery, he was not keen to free them or otherwise get rid of them because of his long absences in military service and Mary’s ill health. (Mary favored eventual emacipation and educated Arlington slaves, as did the other Custis family members, in anticipation of the end of slavery. Lee did not object.) He was the executor of the Custis estate and freed all slaves at Arlington in December 1862 in accordance with the will. Reference: http://www.nps.gov/arho/historyculture/slavery.htm
126 suoehprom
June 17th, 2008 at 10:59 am
D-Day stands for “Day of Days” and was a common military term used to describe the beginnings of military action, until this one in particuliar gained such notariety, since then it has not been used for any other military action.
127 Dandelion
June 18th, 2008 at 5:40 am
“I wouldn’t regard number 12 as an oddity, considering the fact that the area that now constitutes Finland was under Swedish rule at the time. New York was founded by the Dutch but we don’t see that on the list.”
I agree. But otherwise this list was great, and I learned a lot of new things.
128 Shadow
June 18th, 2008 at 6:01 am
Sharki – I was born and raised in the Southeastern US, and I can tell you that they gloss over the vast majority of details here about the Civil War. In fact, History in its entirety seems to be losing its signifigance. Nearly everything I’ve learned about the vast majority of the world in my case is self taught. The public school system here is just plain pathetic.
129 sikamikanica
June 18th, 2008 at 11:27 am
mmm beer….I love oddity lists
btw, 1st comment, long time reader!!!
130 kiwiboi
June 18th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
sikamikanica – welcome aboard
131 kimber
June 18th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
Nicholas II was not a grandson of Victoria. His wife Alexandra (formerly Princess Alix of Hesse) was Victoria’s granddaughter. And while Wilhelm II was Victoria’s grandson, George V was her eldest son.
132 warrrreagl
June 19th, 2008 at 9:27 am
OOOPS! I just realized now where I read that fact about Abel Tasman hehehehe…..
133 harM
June 20th, 2008 at 11:32 pm
i m not anti-Gandhi or anything. i also agree that he didn’t deserve the noble prize. i was born to a Sikh family in India, and well people of the religion were ignored while the whole free-the-India-ordeal. he was very pro-Hindu kind of an individual and somewhat of racist to other religions. i don’t belong to any religion but seeing that such a great personality and peace loving person can have racist view of other people, simply says that they don’t deserve the Nobel prize.
he was a self-acclaimed Hindu mystic but he was great politician but that was all there is to it. i am pro-Gandhi but there are some realities that are overshadowed by his goodness.
134 harM
June 20th, 2008 at 11:35 pm
ooo btw.. more on Gandhi.. his assassin was once his supporter.
just something I’d to throw out there.
135 Suicide_Tears_13
June 20th, 2008 at 11:36 pm
I really hope there’s a second list adding to this, because this list is awesome
136 Howdy
June 21st, 2008 at 2:51 pm
George V was not Victoria’s eldest son. Edward VII was.
137 jen c
June 23rd, 2008 at 5:17 am
tsar nicholas II was not related to victoria by blood ( i don’t think?); however, his wife certainly was.
138 mellafe
June 23rd, 2008 at 1:36 pm
Re: #4. Bernardo O’Higgins was not Irish, he came from an Irish family though and he was born in Chile. Also, he wasn’t the first Chilean president, although the first one did come from another country: Argentina.
139 Anon
June 25th, 2008 at 12:33 am
D-Day is just military code. The hypen is used like a colon. It’s merely the abbreviation with the word it’s abbreviating. Like C-Central I-Intelligence A-Agency
140 mohadeseh
June 25th, 2008 at 3:21 am
thaks for them but some of them not be very intersting.
141 Be-dev
June 25th, 2008 at 11:26 am
D-Day means Decision-Day.
142 AmazingThor
June 25th, 2008 at 12:47 pm
The Nobel Peace prize is arbitrary and meaningless. Arafat, a terrorist, won one. Al Gore won one for making a friggin’ power point. It’s no more noteworthy than winning “Best Smile” from your highschool year book.
143 Tim
June 25th, 2008 at 8:00 pm
Joseph Stain was not his real name it was Iosif(Joseph)Vissarionovich Dzhugashvili.Stalin was a name he took.STALIN means STEEL.He wasn’t even Russian,he was from the Republic of Georgia.
Jefferson Davis the first and only President of the Confederate States of America was born in Kentucky(not a Confederate state)the same state as Abe Lincoln! And he was the son-in-law of another U.S.President Zachary Taylor.
Robert E.Lee was the President’s first choice to lead the Union army against the Confederates.Robert E.Lee’s wife was George Washington’s (step)great granddaughter.
Ulysses S.Grant was at the the beginning of the Civil War a civilian
storekeeper living in Saint Louis,Mo.He was not a infranty officer when he first originally served in the U.S.Army.He was in the quartermaster corps(supply type).And his name was not Ulysses S.Grant it was Hiram Ulysses Grant.He changed it when he entered West Point because he didn’t want other cadets to call him HUG!The S. doesn’t mean anything it is just an initial.
Harry S Truman doesn’t have a middle name either and it should not have a period behing it!Just an S!
And last but not least, Henry Ford and his wife had an adopted child from China, though as much research as I have done on the subject, I can not find any reference to the sex, name or what ever became of the child!
144 Vera Lynn
June 25th, 2008 at 8:49 pm
Stalin did that on purpose. My history is rusty, but he choose that name after he got in power because his “predecessor” did something similar. Or the man who Stalin was predecessor to, did the same thing after he took “office” I need to go review my history notes. My convoluted point? Stalin was not the only leader to choose a name. Whew. Need a drink.
145 Drogo
June 26th, 2008 at 3:04 am
Hitler’s real last name was “Schickelgruber” or some such spelling. I don’t remember what they said the reason was for him to chose Hitler as a name.
146 Aisley
June 28th, 2008 at 7:50 pm
To Mr. Grant:
You probably has never been so right in your life like this time. Humans need to understand that is not inteligent to judge other people with the “eyes” of our own culture and experience.
How many people, upon seeing indians from the Amazone river, feel so much pitty for the way they live and all the things they lack. What the people don’t realize is that probably those indians are living better that they do:
1. Is the mortgage crisis taking away your sleep? not to the indians; they don’t even have mortgages.
2. The TV transmission system is going to change in 2009! Well the indians couldn’t care less, even if it changes in the next two minutes.
3. Your company is streamlining resources and there’s a layoff comming! Eh, those indians have nothing to do about it.
4. What a cool HDTV you got! And it costs $7,800.00 that will take you 10 minutes before forever to pay! Well, in the Amazone they don’t have credit card companies extorsioning them.
5. And…. their next door neighbor lives like a 5 miles from them; and guess what? are not the Joneses.
After thinking on this, I wouldn’t be surprise if they think that we are the ones to be pitty.
147 Harri
July 1st, 2008 at 6:10 am
I wonder what is odd with #12? Most cities of Finland are founded either by some Swedish King or Russian Emperor. By the time King Gustaf Wasa founded Helsinki in 1550, the capital of Finland was Turku, founded by the Swedes in abt. 1220. Helsinki became the capital of Finland in 1812 by the order of Emperor Alexander I, the Grand Duke of Finland.
148 Polly Odyssey
July 1st, 2008 at 9:55 am
9. Josef Stalin once studied to be a priest.
i can’t wait to tell my friends this
149 aaa
July 3rd, 2008 at 3:47 pm
Half of this stuff is completely not true.
150 Charlie
July 6th, 2008 at 5:28 pm
Surely everyone knew that the european monarchy was hideously inbred? and the helsiki sweden thing aint suprosing because of how many times the borders have shifted in the past 500 years.
151 diatryma
July 18th, 2008 at 9:10 pm
A little late on the scene but, golly folks, so many of you do seem to get heated up about purported historical facts. Just take it as infotainment, as most history is anyway. And remember that information from the internet is really interesting but should be generally taken with the same respect you’d give a drunk in a bar. SOME of it may be true.
If I may: an example. My favourite death of all time was that of the ancient Greek poet Aeschylus, who was said to be killed by a falling tortoise dropped by an eagle. No-one can prove the truth or fallacy of this one way or the other. It is plausible, because Golden Eagles in Greece today drop tortoises onto rocks (often rock platforms)so they can get to the soft middle bit. So much time and so many kilobytes have been taken up by people conjecturing on this. So what? It MAY have been true and should not be dismissed as a lie. But then, it could very well have been a good Greek yarn. We’ll never know.
The good news is that so many people are interested. Just don’t use this stuff as anything to nail your money or actions on. That’s what makes religious wars, pogroms, and much unnecessary internecine strife. Remember: history is an art (too often with a capital “f”) not a science.
152 CaleyRuhan
July 21st, 2008 at 8:10 pm
Q; Thank you.
It is not the “pork and beans war” it is, in fact, the “pig war”. It was fought on the island of San Juan in northern Washington.
Please, if you’re going to post a list, research the facts yourself! There are too many inaccuracies!
153 marsoult
August 8th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
Tim: Although Grant didn’t like his initials “HUG”, he wanted to be known as Ulysses Hiram Grant, not Ulysses S. Grant. He didn’t change his name when he entered West Point. He was nominated for admission to West Point by a congressman called Thomas Hamer. When Hamer signed the papers for Grant’s appointment, he wrote down “Ulysses S. Grant”. Grant tried to correct the mistake when he entered West Point but he was told that the name he had been registered under couldn’t be changed. Hamer chose “S” for Grant’s middle initial because he remembered Grant’s mother’s maiden name was Simpson; although Grant later wrote in a letter to his wife that “it does not stand for anything”.
154 Leicester Wagg
September 5th, 2008 at 12:56 pm
First time I have seen this site .What great fun to read all the comments from people whodo nothave a clue what they are talking about..keep it up its great fun,
You would all make good MP, ( Member of parliment for those who do not know !!! )
155 b4truth
October 4th, 2008 at 7:26 pm
Gandhi was the only person to defy British Rule over India and who won through non violent means. To denigrate his achievements is mean and petty. The English massacred unarmed Indians at Amritsar which had nothing to do with him. Thank you Mr. Graves, by the way most wars were funded and profited by world bankers.
156 joe
October 15th, 2008 at 4:10 pm
Yeah I was interested in these facts until I saw the one about D-Day. D doesn’t stand for Day it stands for Dooms i.e. Dooms-Day
157 Baxter
October 15th, 2008 at 4:24 pm
Wrong I’m afraid, Joe. Why would the Allies refer to the invasion of Northern Europe as ‘Dooms-Day’? The ‘D’ in ‘D-Day’ does indeed stand for ‘Day’, but that is not such an anachronism in the context of a military operation. There are other terms like ‘H-Hour’ and ‘A-Assault’. It’s simply a shorthand term.
158 EC
October 24th, 2008 at 11:38 pm
Couple notes:
19. The Kellogg-Briand Pact doesn’t outlaw war. It basically just created the concept of Crime Against Peace. So you can’t invade another country to annex territory, and use of force generally has to be rationalized by the right to self and/or collective defense.
16. Conflating Vlad Tsepes and MacBeth is ridiculous. The highly fictive account of the play aside, the historic MacBeth is generally seen as a generous, good king, who ruled for 17 years.
13. The ‘D’ in D-Day does not stand for ‘Day’. That concept is something of a retronym. There were lettered Days in the course of WWII related to operational actions: A-Day, C-Day, G-Day, I-Day, K-Day etc. None of the letters stood for anything. (the exceptions of course, V-E Day & V-J Day). D-Day is just more commonly known because the actions of that particular D-Day were so momentous.
2. Technically, yes, George I came from an area that is now in Germany. However, Germany as a united country did not exist at the time. George I was the ruler of the Electorate of Hanover. He was next in line to the British throne, so the two countries became, briefly, merged through a personal union, until Victoria. She was in line for the British throne, but not the Hanover one, as Hanover followed Salic law, which didn’t give women status in succession. George was far from an oddity, at any rate. Less than a century before, the King was William II, who was Dutch. The Stuarts before that were originally Scots. And the houses of Tudor, York and Lancaster were, in their origin, French. England hasn’t had an “English” monarch since 1066.
159 GTT
November 25th, 2008 at 8:01 am
I always thought D-Day meant Disembarkation-Day (as in, the day a bunchload of soldiers disembarked from their ships to storm the beaches). This is what I had always heard at least.
Anyway, as to the Gandhi debate, while I agree that he preached a non-violent independence from Britain, I cant just gloss over the fact that he was, in fact, racist. In any case, the NPP is xtremely political so I dont know how important it really is…
160 DC
December 2nd, 2008 at 11:18 am
From what I’ve been told growing up, D-Day stood for disembarkment day, since it was allies pilling out of boats into France.
161 Kalyan
January 9th, 2009 at 11:51 pm
GTT – Will have to politely disagree with you. If you knew Indian history, you would know that Gandhi would have given his life before he was called a racist.
Why? He worked his entire life to up lift lower caste (very similar to racism) people in India. He went so far ahead to call these people, “the people of god” – HARIJAN (HARI is god and JAN is People!)
If you have any evidence that Gandhi was racist, i would be more than happy to study the same and revert back to you.
162 nikki bonds
January 12th, 2009 at 2:03 am
SEE!!! i ALWAYS try to explain how hard the egyptians partied. i mean, u work hard, u play hard, and with all the great structures, educational advances, and every other greatness that came out of egypt, who DOESNT deserve a cold brew after all that? lol
163 XC
January 28th, 2009 at 5:15 pm
Somebody already said it, but was obviously ignored:
Nicholas the II was NOT Victoria’s grandchild, his WIFE was.
You really need to fix that, because it’s wrong.
164 Matt42
January 28th, 2009 at 7:44 pm
“2. England’s King George I was actually German.”
Dom Pedro I, a brazilian emperor (actually the first one) was portuguese.
165 Mark
February 14th, 2009 at 3:18 am
Matt42: Wouldn’t suprise me as the Portuguese were the major colonial force in Brazil. They still speak Portuguese I believe.
On the D-Day thing, recently the US Military has used “D” for day. But in WWII it had no particular meaning.
166 PH
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:52 pm
“145. Drogo:Hitler’s real last name was “Schickelgruber” or some such spelling. I don’t remember what they said the reason was for him to chose Hitler as a name.”
Actually it was Hitler´s father(Alois Schickelgruber)who changed it to Hitler.Adolf Hitler wasn´t even born at the time.So he had nothing to do with a name change.
167 soph
April 27th, 2009 at 2:30 am
#19 didn’t last long
168 Shaaronie
April 27th, 2009 at 7:44 pm
Only living people can be nominated for the Noble Peace Prize. At the time of it’s issuance, Ghandi was dead.
169 Michael
May 2nd, 2009 at 8:49 pm
3. Abel Tasman “discovered” Tasmania, New Zealand and Fiji, on his first voyage, but managed to completely miss mainland Australia!
OK, thats hilarious. Even I couldn’t manage that.
170 RollErCoAsTrs
May 17th, 2009 at 3:03 pm
Dear Mr. Graves and Kaylan,
Do some more research and you will see that Gandhi wrote a lot about his hatred of other races, especially the black man. It was pretty common at the time for this kind of thought, and Gandhi was no different.
It was also common practice for Gandhi to give young girls colonics and it was written that he actually did this quite often. You speak as if you know the man. It’s funny.
171 Jasper
May 25th, 2009 at 3:04 am
i have not read all posts, so sorry if this has been brought up, but 13 us incorrect, one of my friends has recently done a project on this topic, and according to all history teachers i have asked, the D in D-Day does not actually stand for anything, it was just a a name.
172 norkio
July 27th, 2009 at 12:13 pm
#11, the constitution of the Confederate states banned slave trade, but it did not ban slave ownership, loaning, giving or otherwise moving slaves from one owner to another. They were property. New slaves could not be brought into the region, but existing slaves would remain in slavery and all offspring would be born into slavery. any escaped slaves would be brought back to their original owner, which was supported in the north and the south. We need to be careful about making the assumption that banning the slave trade would have put an end to slavery. The war wasn’t all about slavery, it was one facet of a much bigger issue.
173 g0alpost1
September 4th, 2009 at 10:16 am
Number 6 and 11 are very funny.
174 alexman
September 7th, 2009 at 3:34 pm
ghandi caused instability and riots and violence even if you support his cause those facts remain.
the confederates banned slave importing from africa because the british had outlawed global slave trade and they and the french (among other) strictly enforced it by attacking and arresting any ship that tried it.
the muslims of algeria continued capturing and selling white slaves until the US attacked them in the 1800′s
175 kristi
October 24th, 2009 at 1:55 am
You are taught #2 in australian schools
176 pontius pilate
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:44 am
did you all know:
-that hitler was once hired to be a strip teaser by a group of rich old jew women?
-that dracula set out to live in india to find out about ghandi’s women?
-that i could send you plenty of these history oddities without any historical evidence just by typing what my head tells my hands?
…ow, c’mon, why do we believe in Tequila Mockingbird when his/her name can’t be believable at one glance? Tequila-being a drunkard while mockingbird-mocks us readers into being so gullible… he has no proofs at all. Amen.
177 Michigander1
December 3rd, 2009 at 12:32 am
Schiesl, if you won the Toledo war, why did the feds give us the U.P. to keep us from going south?
BTW- Hitler was nominated for the nobel peace prize- you can look it up on the Nobel website. Before the war, and before people knew what he was doing, he was viewed worldwide as a wonderful leader and savior of the oppressed German people. Of course, he wasn’t, but in truth was an evil, degenerate bastard. Sometimes, people just latch on to a leader and make them in their own image.
178 Rene Spirlet from Belgium
December 14th, 2009 at 2:11 pm
#13 is wrong : d stands for ” decision ” Decision Day … that’s it !
179 Nancy
December 28th, 2009 at 6:01 pm
You write, “7. Kaiser Wilhelm II, Tsar Nicholas II and George V were all grandchildren of Queen Victoria.”
Are you sure? I always thought that Nicholas II’s wife, Alexandra, was the descendant of Queen Victoria. Her line, which originated with the Queen, carried the hemophilia gene. Am I just middle-aged and confused?
180 Lizzie
April 13th, 2010 at 12:39 pm
@Nancy [179]: I agree with you!
181 BobNickMad
April 24th, 2010 at 2:24 am
@munro [34]:
I thought the revolution for independence in India would have happened even without Gandhi,Gandhi is the one who wanted a peaceful revolution without violence.
182 BobNickMad
April 24th, 2010 at 2:26 am
Anyway,mister list-maker,why not put links to prove the accuracy of the those oddities.
183 frolona
April 25th, 2010 at 11:56 pm
Yes it is correct. This is why it is known as the day of days. I’m not a history teacher or anything like that but I did listen intently to my father and uncle who both were there. my father on the beach and my uncle in Ike’s staff.
184 frolona
April 25th, 2010 at 11:57 pm
no 13 that is
185 john
June 6th, 2010 at 5:09 pm
Biggest oddity is the "Russian" revolution.
Financed by the wealthiest capitalist bankers in the world (Jacob Schiff financed it to the tune of $1 billion).
There were only 13 ethnic Russians in the first Soviet government
Most of the first government of the USSR 264 out of 384 were former exiles from New York who came to Russia after the fall of the Tzarist regime.
186 TinyWilk
June 26th, 2010 at 4:28 pm
"D" in D-Day stands for deliverance. It stood for Europe's deliverance from the Nazi Regime. Please double check your facts and support the troops.
187 Tiny Wilk
June 26th, 2010 at 4:29 pm
"D" in D-day stands for deliverance. It was deliverance day. It was Europe's Deliverance from the Nazi Regime
188 Matt
June 30th, 2010 at 10:32 pm
the “D” in D-Day did stand for Day
but it meant as the Day of Days
just like H-hour
the Hour of Hours
189 OhBoy
July 3rd, 2010 at 4:31 am
I think the point that needs to be made is that the Confederate Constitution did not make slavery illegal as suggested in the list, but simply limited the importation of slaves. In fact, it was very much pro-slavery, prohibiting any laws "impairing the right of property in negro slaves".
190 Magnus von Tesla
July 7th, 2010 at 6:21 am
What the hell is so "odd" about O'Higgins being ethnically Irish? He was born in Chile, he was Chile's first constitutional president. So?
191 MartaCesma
August 19th, 2010 at 4:18 am
and one more mistake i noticed nicholas II of russia was not victoria's grandson but his wife alexandra was!you should get your facts right a simple check on wikipedia will show you his family tree!!how i'm i supposed to believe anything you write after this??