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
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.
The Gettysburg Address was made at the dedication of a cemetery November 1863. The Emancipation Proclamation freed the slaves south of the Mason-Dixon line as another way to break the south in January 1863. If you were to read anything about Lincoln, you would know that he believed the war was fought to preserve the union, while Jefferson Davis (CS Pres) believed it was to preserve states’ rights. That’s much oversimplified, but my point is that you might want to get a little more information about the actual causes and events before you start talking out your ass about them.
So what is their excuse now?
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.
very interesting stuff, of course Gandhi didn’t deserve the peace prize
did you just say Gandhi didn’t deserve a peace prize! He was the father of Mother India , he helped gain independence using PEACEFUL tactics!
yes more trivia to show off to my comerades studying history! thanks listverse!!
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!
Wow, really awesome facts! I personally liked # 3, 5, and 7 the best. Crazy stuff!
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.
Clarification on #11 – They banned the importing of slaves from Africa, but the buying/selling of slaves in the US was still going strong.
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.
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??
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
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.
you can also put the odd fact that hitler was a dog trainer
Because of #4 so many streets, buildings and even stores and restaurants are named O’Higgins
lost 654
Hitler was a painter and worked in construction before getting involved in politics.
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
well said
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.
Bin en québécois, c'est le jour J non?
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.
Dracula was real? And an Irishman named Bernardo? Cool
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
Fascinating list, as always. I look forward to looking further into lots of these facts. Especially 11, 17 & 19
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.
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.
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!
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 *****ed 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.
#6 is a killa fact. Love it TM.
Holy ****, Gandhi sure had some resistance to temptation.
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.
Navik: agree with you. Ghidoran: tsk tsk.
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.
Eh I think a lot of these are pretty much common knowledge.
eh sorry guys, sarcasm aint what it used to be, Gandhi was a badass
Interesting list, and interesting comments. It seems like this list could be improved by some clarifications though.
It was called the Pig War actually.
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.
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.
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.
Great list! I actually knew 5,9 and 18 but the rest I’m pleased to say I just learned. Good job Tequila Mockingbird!
Hitler used to make postcards which he sold back when he lived in Vienna.
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.
i thought we seceded not receded……whatever
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
Cyn, thanks. I was wondering why there is a little red x where the pictures should be.
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
MPW: You’re right, but I wasn’t in Italy I think it was in Austria.
Jfrater / Cyn: What the hell is happening to listverse?
WarningDontReadThis: it is a glitch with the new servers – hopefully it is now fixed.
I have fixed the images and added a couple of clarifications to the text
Wow, I did not know that they lowered the taxes when the Boston Tea Party happened…. Those colonists sure were *****y
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…
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.
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.”
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".
kreachure: your wish is my command – I have edited Australia.
i never knew #13. i thought it stood for something else.
OOOOO! Thank you for the link there! I’m impressed!
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.
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!
jfrater: Wow. Thanks for that! Just trying to help!
Csimmons: Hehe, I knew I couldn’t be the only one who thought of Weezer after reading 17!
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.
The war continues to today…between the Wolverines and the Buckeys