Top 10 Common Historical Myths
Published on November 29, 2007 - 90 Comments
Over the course of many years, we come to believe certain things to be historical facts when in fact, they are not. These historical errors have passed down through the ages and continue to mislead people. Therefore, we are now happy to present you with the List Universe Myth Busters episode: Top 10 Historical Errors.
10. Abner Doubleday Invented Baseball
This very common myth of baseball credits Doubleday with inventing the game, supposedly in Elihu Phinney’s cow pasture in Cooperstown, New York, in 1839. In 1905, a committee was appointed to investigate the origins of the game, their conclusion was:
“the first scheme for playing baseball, according to the best evidence obtainable to date, was devised by Abner Doubleday at Cooperstown, New York, in 1839. [In] the years to come, in the view of the hundreds of thousands of people who are devoted to baseball, and the millions who will be, Abner Doubleday’s fame will rest evenly, if not quite as much, upon the fact that he was its inventor … as upon his brilliant and distinguished career as an officer in the Federal Army.”
In fact, this conclusion was based on the testimony of one man, who was of questionable credibility. Jeff Idelson of the Baseball Hall of Fame has said that baseball was not really invented anywhere, but as far as history is concerned, the first written rules of baseball were penned by Alexander Joy Cartwright for the baseball club The Knickerbockers. On June 3, 1953, Congress officially credited Cartwright with inventing the modern game of baseball.
9. The Colossus of Rhodes
Most ancient and even modern paintings of the now long gone Ancient Wonder of the World, the Colossus of Rhodes show him straddling the harbor entrance with ships entering the port beneath his legs. The Colossus was a statue (the tallest in the ancient world) of the Greek God Helios, built between 292 and 280 BC and standing at a height of 30m (100ft). Contrary to the popular misconception that the statues legs were apart, the Colossus actually stood with his legs slightly apart on one side of the entrance to the harbor. This renders virtually all illustrations of the statue, incorrect. The image above is a truthful depiction of his likely stance.
8. Witches were burnt in Salem
in 1692 and 1693, anti-witch Mania hit Salem, Massachusetts resulting in a series of trials that lead to the deaths of 20 accused witches. Over 150 people were tried for the crime of Witchery. Contrary to the popular myth that the witches were burnt, they were, in fact, hanged to death. Of the 20, 14 were women and 6 were men. All were executed according to this method with the exception of one man who died during judicial torture.
7. Lizzie Borden took an axe…
Unfortunately this myth rears its ugly head quite often, and often no amount of effort is sufficient to disprove it to the true believers. First off, Lizzie - she is famous through the children’s poem:
Lizzie Borden took an axe
And gave her mother forty whacks.
And when she saw what she had done
She gave her father forty-one.
In fact, her father was axed 11 times and her step-mother 18 or 19 but that is not the real myth - the real myth is the belief that Lizzie Borden committed the crime at all. After a mere one hour of jury deliberation, Lizzie was found innocent of the crime. To give further weight to her innocence, shortly before her trial a second axe murder happened in the area. Additionally, Lizzie was found with no blood on her minutes after the crime took place, and no murder weapon was ever found.
6. Salome Wanted John the Baptist Killed
The Bible tells the tale of Herod executing John the Baptist and giving his head as a gift to his daughter in reward for her dance at his birthday. Most people mistakenly believe that Salome, the daughter, requested this out of anger for John refuses her advances. It was, in fact, Herodias, her mother who wanted John killed, not Salome - she was merely the messenger.
And when the daughter of the same Herodias had come in, and had danced, and pleased Herod, and them that were at table with him, the king said to the damsel: Ask of me what thou wilt, and I will give it thee. And he swore to her: Whatsoever thou shalt ask I will give thee, though it be the half of my kingdom. Who when she was gone out, said to her mother, What shall I ask? But her mother said: The head of John the Baptist. And when she was come in immediately with haste to the king, she asked, saying: I will that forthwith thou give me in a dish, the head of John the Baptist. Mark 6:22-25
This popular myth has been seen in opera, poetry, and painting.
5. Edison Invented the Lightbulb
In fact, Thomas Edison not only did not invent the lightbulb, he did not invent many of the things attributed to him. His shrewd business skills enabled him to steal, improve, and patent many ideas before their original inventors were able to. He was, in addition, a ruthless man who attempted to discredit other inventors in order to gain popularity for his own. Prior to Edison’s patent for the electric lightbulb in 1880, electric lights had already been invented. In 1840, British Astronomer and Chemist, Warren de la Rue, enclosed a platinum coil in a vacuum tube and passed an electric current through it, thus creating the world’s first light bulb - a full 40 years before Edison.
4. Pope Joan
This particular myth has been dealt with elsewhere on the site, but it is fitting that it be repeated here. The myth tells us that a young woman dressed as a priest and went to Rome to study. Eventually she became Pope but gave birth to a child while in a papal procession, causing the crowds to kill her by stoning. In fact, there never was a Pope Joan. The myth seems to have originated around the 13th century from the writings of Martin of Opava (Martin Polonus), a Polish chronicler, and it generally places Joan in the 9th century Papacy. Aside from Catholic literature, even enemies of the Catholic Church at the time (for example, Photius) make no mention at all of a female Pope. According to the Catholic Encyclopaedia:
“Between Leo IV and Benedict III, where Martinus Polonus places her, she cannot be inserted, because Leo IV died 17 July 855, and immediately after his death Benedict III was elected by the clergy and people of Rome; but owing to the setting up of an antipope, in the person of the deposed Cardinal Anastasius, he was not consecrated until 29 September. Coins exist which bear both the image of Benedict III and of Emperor Lothair, who died 28 September 855; therefore Benedict must have been recognized as pope before the last-mentioned date.”
The recent resurgence in the belief in this myth is most like the result of Anti-Catholic and feminist wishful thinking, according to Philip Jenkins, author of The New Anti-Catholicism.
3. Lady Godiva Rode Naked
Lady Godiva was an Anglo-Saxon noble woman who is supposed to have ridden through the streets of Coventry naked in order to force her husband - Leofric (968–1057) - to remove an unfair tax on his tenants. Both she and her husband were very generous to the poor and religious institutions in their time. In 1043 Leofric founded and endowed a Benedictine monastery at Coventry and it is believed that his wife, Godiva, was the primary instigator of this. It is very possible that the legend has sprung from this particular event. But there is no doubt that her husband was a very generous man with little need for coercion. Interestingly, the legend of the Peeping Tom also arises from this myth as later versions of it describe a man, Tom, who peeped at Lady Godiva whilst she rode naked, and was struck blind.
2. “Let them eat Cake”
According to popular myth, Queen Marie Antoinette was heard to say: “S’ils n’ont plus de pain, qu’ils mangent de la brioche.” (”If they have no bread, let them eat brioche”) - referring to the poor. First of all, even if Queen Marie had made this comment, it would have not had the same meaning as it does today. Laws at the time of her reign meant that bakers who ran out of cheap bread, had to sell their finer bread (such as brioche) at the lower price, in order to protect people from ruthless bakers who would make insufficient quantities of inexpensive bread in order to make a bigger profit. That aside, the Queen did not say these words at all, they were actually written by Jean-Jacques Rousseau in his book “Confessions” - written a number of years before Marie Antoinette became Queen. His exact words:
“I recalled the make-shift of a great princess who was told that the peasants had no bread and who replied: ‘Let them eat brioche’. “
The misattribution and perpetuation of this myth is most likely a result of anti-Royal propaganda following the revolution in which she and her husband were murdered.
1. Nero Fiddled while Rome Burned
In July 18 to July 19, 64 AD, the Great Fire of Rome occured. The popular myth surrounding this event is that Nero fiddled whilst he watched Rome burn, and later benefited from its burning by using cleared land for his new palace.
Suetonius and Cassius Dio said that Nero sang the “Sack of Ilium” in stage costume while the city burned. However, Tacitus’ account has Nero in Antium at the time of the fire. Tacitus said that Nero playing his lyre and singing while the city burned was only rumor. In fact, According to Tacitus, upon hearing news of the fire, Nero rushed back to Rome to organize a relief effort, which he paid for from his own funds. After the fire, Nero opened his palaces to provide shelter for the homeless, and arranged for food supplies to be delivered in order to prevent starvation among the survivors. In the wake of the fire, he made a new urban development plan. Houses after the fire were spaced out, built in brick, and faced by porticos on wide roads. Nero also built a new palace complex known as the Domus Aurea in an area cleared by the fire.
Incidentally, the violin (fiddle) would not be invented for a full 1,000 years after the Great Fire of Rome.
Related ListsTop 10 Myths About The Common Cold20 More Interesting Historical Oddities Top 10 Common Dreams And Their Meanings Another 20 Historical Oddities You Don’t Know |
SubscriptionsLike this article? Subscribe to the RSS feed to keep 'em coming, or subscribe via email: |
If you find this site helpful, please leave a donation so you can enjoy the spirit of giving too.
Email This Post
1. Patrask - November 29th, 2007 at 8:07 am
With all the crazy feminists running around these days I wouldn’t be suprised if we actually got a female pope. Except she wouldn’t have to dress up like a male. And wouldn’t be stoned if she had to deliver a baby (though she would probobly be fired for breaking celibacy). Or something.
(No offense to feminists, it’s just that the ones I know are kinda weird)
2. jfrater - November 29th, 2007 at 8:19 am
Patrask: hehe - I prefer your edited comment
Regarding its content: it is not possible for a woman to be a Pope (or a Bishop or Priest) in the Catholic Church - it has been infallibly declared (most recently by John Paul II, and confirmed again by Benedict XVI) which means (whether you believe in infallibility or not) that no Pope can ever change that rule.
3. TerranRich - November 29th, 2007 at 8:23 am
Hah, I was born in (and live 5 minutes away from) the city in which the Lizzie Borden ordeal took place: Fall River, Massachusetts. It’s our one and only claim to fame, so Fall Riverites tend to hold on to it like a lifeline.
4. DiscHuker - November 29th, 2007 at 8:37 am
what is the picture that goes along with Nero all about?
5. Cat Skyfire - November 29th, 2007 at 8:39 am
Yes, Lizzie Borden was acquitted, so officially, she is innocent. However, the second axe murderer was found, and had a clear cause. It may have helped Lizzie’s case, as the concept of a multiple killer made her claims seem that much more likely. They never found the ‘real killers’ or evidence to suggest another suspect. Lizzie did have some damning evidence, including the ’saw her burning a dress’ aspect, but, yep, she is officially innocent on record. But then, so is O.J….
6. dalandzadgad - November 29th, 2007 at 8:41 am
this site has changed my view to see that thomas edison was actually an a**hole. i think he was bashed on a few other lists too.
7. Juggz - November 29th, 2007 at 8:48 am
wow my education is showing, as i hadnt heard of most of these myths and the ones i have heard of were told to me as being stories and nto necassarily fact. Except for edison of course. but thats the american school system for you, I feel sorry for my son.
8. jfrater - November 29th, 2007 at 8:52 am
4: it is graffiti of Nero from the time he reigned - it was too cool to leave off
Cat Skyfire: see?! I said in the item that you can’t convince the believers
dalandzadgad: mine too - before this site I had no idea he was such a scumbag.
Juggz: alas not just the American system - it is bad elsewhere too.
9. Shabab - November 29th, 2007 at 9:30 am
Wow…..lady godiva sure is hot
10. Randall - November 29th, 2007 at 9:36 am
Let’s back off on Edison a bit, shall we? Yes, the man was ruthless, yes he did a lot of the things mentioned here… but as far as the lightbulb goes—the point is that Edison did, in essence, “invent” the thing—because previous lightbulbs simply didn’t work. They didn’t last long enough to be practical, (the filaments would burn out in short order) were not bright enough and didn’t burn with a consistent light… and certainly they were not capable of replacing the then-ubiquitous gas light. Edison’s idea was to try new filaments and new designs in order to make the lightbulb practical and reliable. This he did, after many experiments. And it was a service to mankind, since gaslight was a notoriously dangerous fire hazard.
I know it’s been fashionable for a while to beat up on Edison, but give the man the credit he’s due. If people truly “invented” the light bulb 40 years before he did, then why didn’t we have electric light 40 years earlier?
It’s fairer to say that Edison was a popularizer and improver on other people’s less practical ideas and inventions. No, he didn’t create the light bulb out of whole cloth, but prior to him no one else had been able to make the damn thing work properly.
11. JMurf - November 29th, 2007 at 9:48 am
Shabab: ditto, i would
12. Toto - November 29th, 2007 at 9:57 am
7. Lizzie Borden… see http://crimemagazine.com/borden.htm for a contrary view.
13. Tom - November 29th, 2007 at 9:59 am
Lizzie Borden was acquitted because the jury felt that a woman, under God, could not commit such a heinous crime. How’s that for reasoning?
14. jfrater - November 29th, 2007 at 10:09 am
Lizzie was innocent.
15. Tom - November 29th, 2007 at 10:53 am
Ha ok Johnnie Cochran
16. dan231 - November 29th, 2007 at 11:13 am
Great list, should include links or info about where the info was obtained though. That would help give more credibility.
As far as LB goes, Court TV’s crime website: http://www.crimelibrary.com/no.....dex_1.html has great info on this case. It also goes on to mention that in 1997, Stanford Law conducted a mock retrial and based on 1997 laws, she still would have not been convicted.
There is also a good read about the Salem Witch Trials: http://www.crimelibrary.com/no.....hes/1.html
17. cparker - November 29th, 2007 at 11:24 am
Nero was said to play the lyre, which was common in his day.
18. Lasse - November 29th, 2007 at 11:48 am
Where is Judas in this list? He were recently rehabilitated?
BTW, who would have thougth that about Nero?
19. Blogball - November 29th, 2007 at 12:04 pm
Thanks for sticking up for Edison Randall, for some reason it becomes fashionable when we start hearing negative things about people that we held in high esteem when we were growing to trash him and throw the baby out with the bathwater . This statement I find very unfair “His shrewd business skills enabled him to steal, improve, and patent many ideas before their original inventors were able to. He was, in addition, a ruthless man who attempted to discredit other inventors in order to gain popularity for his own.” I mean what good is a light bulb if it only last a couple of minutes? Al of those endless hour s in the laboratory trying new ideas and trying to make other peoples ideas work better. Now he is regarded as just a ruthless business man by some. Here is how he is described in Wikipedia:
Thomas Alva Edison (February 11, 1847 – October 18, 1931) was an American inventor and businessman who developed many devices that greatly influenced life around the world, including the phonograph and a long lasting light bulb. Dubbed “The Wizard of Menlo Park” by a newspaper reporter, he was one of the first inventors to apply the principles of mass production to the process of invention, and therefore is often credited with the creation of the first industrial research laboratory.
Edison is considered one of the most prolific inventors in history, holding 1,093 U.S. patents in his name, as well as many patents in the United Kingdom, France and Germany.
20. Arkz_Archduke_of_Geeks - November 29th, 2007 at 1:33 pm
yes Edison lied about a lot, but i do believe he also had bad hearing, on the other hand Tesla was a wonderful inventor, imagine the world today if he didnt go bankrupt
21. Randall - November 29th, 2007 at 1:37 pm
Blogball:
Well yeah, that’s it. I don’t know how old you are, but I was born in 1965, and I recall hearing of Edison that he was, yes, the great inventor, but was also businessman and promotor, and so on. And implied in there was, okay… the guy wasn’t the nicest sort, but then what businessman (particularly of that day) is? Basically we were taught that sure, he wasn’t Johny Purebread, and maybe he didn’t invent everything that–at that time–people *thought* he invented–not of whole cloth anyway—but all the same, somebody had to take ideas from small-potatoes tinkerers and make something of them. Edison was a shrewd guy who played up the angle of the lone, obsessive inventor when in reality he was more like the head honcho of a research/product development lab that made better and more practical products/inventions out of ideas–sometimes–that other people had come up with. (But some things Edison *did* come up with himself… if I recall, the phonograph, for example, was entirely his).
But now there’s this trashing of historical figures—even Lincoln’s fair game for mud-slinging now—and, I don’t know… I think it’s rampant political correctness combined with the expanding pussification of our society, combined with some honest, “let’s get to the real truth” attitude. Trouble is, I think the latter is the lowest priority for some people.
22. Toto - November 29th, 2007 at 2:08 pm
Lizzie was innocent.
____________________
How can you be so certain?
23. Blogball - November 29th, 2007 at 2:09 pm
“I think it’s rampant political correctness combined with the expanding pussification of our society, combined with some honest, “let’s get to the real truth” attitude. Trouble is, I think the latter is the lowest priority for some people”
I couldn’t agree with this more Randall. By the way I just looked at the first part of my post. Never try to edit your post after you click send. I had to wait a long time for it to send. Here is what I meant to say For some reason it becomes fashionable when we start hearing negative things about people that we held in high esteem to trash him or her and throw the baby out with the bathwater . Anyway I know you got the gist of what I was trying to say. I am 9 years older so I guess we are around the same generation. I think things took a turn in the 80s & 90s.
24. AndyB123 - November 29th, 2007 at 2:42 pm
The biggest historical myth of them all, has got to be that Columbus discovered America. The viking Leif Erikson went to North America 300 years before Columbus, and built a settlement that lasted for at least 20 years. This is a proven fact. Techically, it was another viking who spotted land, Bjarni Herjulfson, but he didn’t bother to investigate. So Columbus is third, at best.
Calling Columbus the discoverer of America, is like someone claiming to have discovered something just yesterday, when it was in fact discovered in 1707.
That’s your number 1, hands down.
[url]http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Leif+Erikson[/url]
25. Sasha - November 29th, 2007 at 4:03 pm
One thing that bothers me about Edison are things that are taught about him. For example, during my stay in USA, in American History class teacher told us that Edison discovered alternating current, which simply is not true. Look up Nikola Tesla.
26. byaskal - November 29th, 2007 at 4:09 pm
YES, Andy!! Columbus and his landing in the “new” world turned into a violent annihilation of the native people who had been living here for generations. Read “A People’s History of the United States” by Howard Zinn - it’s an AMAZING book!
27. ehhh - November 29th, 2007 at 4:21 pm
get the facts right whoever submited this, according to experts on Salem..some WERE burned..cuz they tohught that was the only way to kill a witch
28. JMurf - November 29th, 2007 at 5:03 pm
ehhh:
some experts used spellcheck
AndyB123:
I suggest you read the book, 1421, The Year China Discovered The World.
China pretty much circumnavigated the world and offers a pretty decent reason why historians didn’t know this, look it up on wikipedia, it probably has something about the book.
After reading it, I think the Chinese were the greatest Empire to have ever existed
29. Ravyn - November 29th, 2007 at 6:04 pm
No one else notice this? In #8 you said
“Of the 20, 14 were women and 5 were men”
Last I checked 14+5=19 not 20. You are missing a person from you count.
30. FekketCantenel - November 29th, 2007 at 6:21 pm
The talk of the Salem Witch Trials, and seeing the name ‘John Procter’, reminded me of the amazing and beautiful movie, ‘The Crucible’. In it (if I remember correctly), all convicted “witches” were hung or crushed, not burned.
Also, a cursory Google search confirms that no “witches” were burned. “ehhh”, care to link to some of these “experts”?
My family and I just finished watching a long and fascinating documentary about Columbus. I don’t know much about Lief Ericson, but Columbus seemed to be the first explorer to actually tell anybody about what he’d found (which backfired on him). In any case, no one even knew about Columbus’ initial explorations until they were publicised in the 1800s. Before that, they thought Amerigo Vespucci and others were the discoverers.
JMurf: Yeah, China’s got an amazing history. It’s too bad they’ve descended into a cruel dictatorship in the last century. I’ve been jaded ever since I read an ebook called ‘Buying the Dragon’s Teeth’ (google for it). Hey, jfrater, think you could do a list based on it?
I appreciate the entry about Salome. I’ve actually heard this misconception once or twice at church! I’m a big fan of John the Baptist, though, so I like people to get the story straight. AFAIK, Salome just had a horrid, bitchy, (legally) incestuous mother.
31. Kelsi - November 29th, 2007 at 7:35 pm
8: Wasn’t there one man crushed to death as well?
And I was glad to see the Marie Antoinette misquote on here. Have you seen that modern film with Kirsten Dunst? I find that part really funny, when she says, “‘Let them eat cake?’ I wound never say something like that.” Or something like that. =P
I actually haven’t heard of a lot of these (therefore bringing the common part of the title into question…) but if someone ever brings up one of them, I certainly will be able to correct them. Good list. =)
32. scott - November 29th, 2007 at 8:10 pm
i’ve actually heard of almost all of these, and to be honest, with the exception of edison ( and i agree with randall) that i was so disappointed to see the truth, like the colossus of rhodes
33. 20Fan20 - November 29th, 2007 at 10:00 pm
Didn’t Thomas Edision invent the electric hammer!
hehehehehe
I think that should have made the Simpsons list just for the image of Marge getting shot with the make up gun.
34. jfrater - November 29th, 2007 at 11:39 pm
Oops - thanks Ravyn - I left of the man who died during torture
Kelsi: that is no doubt the man listed as having died during torture
cparker: I mentioned the lyre in the article
35. Drogo - November 30th, 2007 at 1:02 am
Lizzie Borden???? If the axe don’t fit, you must acquit!
36. chadster - November 30th, 2007 at 2:08 am
The man who died in the witch trials was crushed to death by stones, which were placed upon his chest…
37. Dan231 - November 30th, 2007 at 4:30 am
Ravyn/jfrater: I believe that there was one account of a child being killed as well.
38. Reg123456 - November 30th, 2007 at 5:36 am
Wow, so Tom Edison was a bit of a prick. BIG drop in respect for him on my side.
39. John C. - November 30th, 2007 at 7:50 am
I dunno. Lizzie Borden was almost certainly guilty, and Edison did invent the first practical lightbulb, and Columbus did discover the Americas in the sense that he was the guy who brought their existence to the attention of the entire world.
I’d add to the list of false legends:
Catherine the Great died while having sex with a horse. (She died of natural causes.)
Cleopatra was black. (She was Greek.)
The Inquisition burned millions of people. (It was several thousand, maybe several tens of thousands, but not millions.)
The Americans regularly gave infected blankets to the Indians. (This was proposed once by a British general. No one knows if it was ever actually done.)
Medieval lords had the right to deflower all the virgins on their manors. (They definitely didn’t in England.)
People in Columbus’s time didn’t know the world was round. (Of course they did if they were sailors or knew how to read.)
Black slaves in the South were regularly killed or worked to death. (They were harshly treated, but too valuable to kill.)
People starved to death during the Depression and the Dust Bowl. (Times were tough but there was no starvation.)
King Henry VIII executed all his wives. (He executed two, divorced two, one died, and one survived him.)
Jesus spoke Hebrew. (He, and everyone else in that area at that time, spoke Aramaic.)
Dr. Guillotine died by his own invention. (He didn’t invent it, and he died of natural causes.)
When Irish immigrants arrived in the US, they saw “No Irish Need Apply” signs. (There’s no evidence this ever happened.)
Early humans hunted dinosaurs. (Impossible, as dinosaurs died out tens of millions of years before humans developed.)
Some sort of Old Religion was practiced in rural Europe until it was stamped out by the witchcraft persecutions, which killed millions of women.
(Don’t believe anything the Wiccans say about history; the witchcraft persecutions killed thousands, maybe tens of thousands, but not millions; and men as well as women were executed for witchcraft.)
Coca-Cola invented Santa Claus. (Santa predates the earliest Coke Christmas ads by about a hundred years. The Coke ads did help popularize Santa in Europe.)
The “Spanish influenza” of 1918 came from Spain. (It likely came from a US army camp in Kansas.)
135,000 people were killed in the 1945 bombing of Dresden. (35,000, maybe. Still horrible, of course.)
40. jfrater - November 30th, 2007 at 8:02 am
John C.: Wow - thanks for such an extensive list - that was a very interesting read.
41. Randall - November 30th, 2007 at 10:37 am
John C.: I am going to guess that you, like myself, are a big fan of Cecil Adams. (The Straight Dope). Am I correct?
42. Bonnie_ - November 30th, 2007 at 12:27 pm
Eh, don’t read Howard Zinn’s “A People’s History.” Zinn is a Marxist and hates America. Plus, his facts are wrong time and time again, like when he declares that George Washington was the richest American. Zinn is a maroon, to quote Bugs Bunny.
On the other hand, Nikola Tesla is an American hero. I adore him so much I tried to let my husband name our daughter “Tesla” and call her Tess. He put his foot down firmly. Turns out there was a bad 80’s hair band called Tesla. Who knew?
43. evan - November 30th, 2007 at 1:07 pm
135,000 people were killed in the 1945 bombing of Dresden. (35,000, maybe. Still horrible, of course.)
depends on whos figures you believe, no one knows for sure, thats a problem with firebombs that create huge infernos and firestorms, bodies can literally disappear…
44. AndyB123 - November 30th, 2007 at 2:40 pm
JMurf
I think it’s debatable which of the empires was the greatest. You have the Romans, Egyptians, Persians, etc. The thing about Vikings, which sets them apart, is that they never forced their beliefs on anyone. For a small band of people from the North to achive so much in so little time, I would certainly include them in the list of great civilizations. They discovered North America, Greenland, lay the foundation for Russia (Rus, another name for a Swedish Viking), turned Iceland into a country (after kicking out the hermit-monks), they ruled England for a very long time, they went to the Bysans, down to Africa, and into the Mediterreanean. They were the greatest fighters of their time (since they were absolutely fearless), as well as the best ship-builders, impressive even by todays standards. Their Religion is uniqe, and they had their own alphabet, which has been in use from around 100 C.E (AD) (earliest find) to this day.
Okay, I’m done with the ranting : )
Another myth - Cleopatra was not a great beauty -she was in fact quite ugly.
And didn’t Lizzie Borden use (?) some sort of meat-cleaver ? Think I read that somewhere.
About being executed for witch-craft: I believe they put a wooden board on the victims chest, and placed stones on top, until he/she died.
It’s quite interesting that they woke up from this insanity when the kids began accusing more prominent women in Salem.
45. Radioweezle - November 30th, 2007 at 4:30 pm
Well, Edison was like many other ‘inventors’ of that age in that yes he did patent many inventions. But unlike those others he was not a true inventor/scientist.
Many of his ‘inventions’ were actually built upon the discovery of other.. which is not all bad, that’s the way things worked and still does in some cases.
He understood very little of what he found and a lot of that was actually done by his lab workers, not him. But he certainly took all the credit.
There are even stories that he overheard someone talking about their ideas of how to create a light bulb on a train and that is what gave him a jump ahead.
I totally agree with Bonnie about Tesla. He was in a totally different class than Edison. He was very well educated when he came over from Europe (he was from Croatia) and worked for Edison for a short time when he first arrived. Didn’t take him long to realize that Edison did not really understand how/why many of his inventions worked.
Thats one reason the power grid now used around the world started with Tesla, not Edison (who wanted to use only DC as opposed to our polyphase or AC systems). Edison did not understand AC and even thought it that AC motors would not work.
Edison even electocuted an Elephant and “invented” the electric chair to try to prove that DC was safer.
Tell that to the horses and people killed by his generators in the steets of NYC due to poor insulation of cables under the streets.
It was all about business, Westinghouse backed Tesla and Edison was going to loose the business.
Edison noticed a line of carbon that appeared inside his light bulbs but he never understood what it was or how important it was (even though he did name it after himself aka: the Edison Effect). The British scientist Fleeming understood that it was electron flow for the heated element and thus the electron tube or ‘valve’ was born.
So IMHO Edison only took advantage of others for his own gain both financial and limelight (sorry for the pun).
When you flip any switch on for any piece of electonics or an appliance you can trace it directly back to the true inventor/scientist Nikola Tesla.
46. jen - November 30th, 2007 at 6:52 pm
I think a lot of people believe people were burned at Salem because they confuse the Salem witch trials with the witch hints of Europe. Only 19 people were executed in Salem, and they were all hanged or crushed. Millions of people were convicted of witchcraft in Europe over the centuries, though, and many of them were burned at the stake.
47. Blogball - December 1st, 2007 at 12:56 am
Radioweezle Said:
“He was not a true inventor/scientist”
So What about the Phonograph and What about his principles of mass production.
Radioweezle Said:
“So IMHO Edison only took advantage of others for his own gain both financial and limelight”
Sorry again, I think this is a cheap shot.
Did he or did he not work his butt off in the laboratory?
So let’s say he worked hard because he was thinking about profit first.
Is business and profit bad?
Should we just invent or make stuff better in the laboratory and not promote it because it would sound like we are acting arrogant if we brag about it?
We will always need people like Edison weather we like it or not to promote the wares that have been created or improved on and inspire others to do the same.
48. Randall - December 3rd, 2007 at 6:34 am
Radioweezle:
It sounds to me like you’ve pretty much bought, hook, line, and sinker, the great myth of Nikola Tesla, which has been pushed by non-scientist “home tinkerer” types for years. He’s their hero… largely because, later in life, he went nearly full-out whacko and pushed ideas like broadcast power and so on. The thought being, gee whiz, if Tesla could be an outsider with great ideas, then so can I!
Go here: http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a3_274.html
49. Radioweezle - December 3rd, 2007 at 1:25 pm
Randall….
Well if you don’t believe then tell me why the ‘new’ idea of broadcasting power was just in the news a few months ago.
It was MIT University.. heres a MSNBC link.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19098305/
They don’t think its a myth. And Telsa proofed it at Colorado Springs in 1901. It’s documented and is a fact.
Once again… look at your power grid and ALL polyphase applications.
Not a Myth by a long shot. Yeah he did go off the deep end in later years but he had already introduced all his patients by then.
Historical facts don’t lie. You’ll find only the general public still buys in the the Edison deal, any one dealing with power/radio/TV knows and understands it.
And yes Tesla was an ‘outsider’
Blogball:
Yes he did ‘invent’ somethings like the phonograph and the moving picture. Mass production was Ford but he was close friends with Edison so I can’t argue a point that I don’t know about. Maybe he did.
He assistants certainly worked their butts off for him.
But as far as things electrical, he had a very limited understanding of it’s principles. If he did know all about it he would have jumped ahead of others including Tesla but he didn’t.
BTW: Edison (CON-ED) bought the rights to produce all the polyphase systems from Westinghouse (Tesla’s patients) Unlike Edison, Tesla was terrible at finances and almost went broke several times. Selling his patients was the only way he stayed a float.
Of course there is the issue of Edison vs all the other phonograph manufactures at the time. The Edison diamond discs in which the needle moves vertically instead of horizontally like his original design in a failed attempt to stop his competetion.
Ever wonder why early phonographs are refered to as Victrolas and not Edisons. Victor Talking Machine Company which merged with RCA in 1929, Nipper was Victors logo, not RCA but thats another story.
Edison is certainly a great American Historical figure but he still was what we would refer to as a ’shade tree mechanic’ and that’s not bad! Even Tesla himself said he admired Edison and went to work for him, his first job over here.
50. Randall - December 3rd, 2007 at 1:53 pm
Radioweezle:
Nobody said broadcast power was a total myth, pal. Did you read the link I posted? I read yours. Return the courtesy.
And by the way, Tesla didn’t actually “proofed” it in 1901. To quote from the link I posted: “…there were reports that he managed to light 200 incandescent bulbs at a distance of 26 miles. But this was never confirmed and it is damned hard to believe. (Tesla coils, in my experience, can illuminate fluorescent bulbs, but usually at a distance of only a few feet.) Tesla never published a thorough description of his work and electrical engineers scratch their heads when told of his ideas today.”
And then: “Even if the thing worked it’s hard to see how you’d avoid wasting huge amounts of energy.”
Lastly: “Many people excuse Tesla’s failures by saying he was too far ahead of his time. I doubt it. His understanding of the medium in which he worked was primitive. He refused to accept the complex nature of the atom and for years denied Einstein’s theories. His problems arose largely from the fact that he was an eccentric who was unable to work with (and consequently to learn from) other people, and the increasing unreality of his ideas shows it. Broadcast power is Exhibit A.”
51. Radioweezle - December 3rd, 2007 at 4:30 pm
Randall:
Well it certainly appears that some just don’t get it. Power Transmission did and does work, all be it, very minute but it is something to be built upon. Remember, Edison said that a motor could never be built that would run AC.
Doesn’t matter that he was not a physicist as Einstein was. Bottom line here is that he knew what he was doing because he understood how it worked and Edison did not. I believe that was the original thought.
Eccentric or not, his systems worked and is still working. Can’t say that for many others.
Case closed. Over and Out.
52. Randall - December 4th, 2007 at 7:21 am
Radioweezle:
Hardly “case closed.” And while we’re at it, it’s “albeit,” by the way… not “all be it.”
Clearly Tesla did *not* understand what he was doing–the article I quoted states this–Tesla’s grasp of the technology and science he was delving into was tenuous at best.
And Tesla’s knowledge of, and reaction to, Einstein and his theories *does* very much matter here. It clearly indicates that Tesla was nothing more than an eccentric tinkerer whose ideas were only partly based in true science, and mostly based in nonsense.
I grant you, he deserved more respect than he finally got in the end—dying poor and unknown–but he wasn’t the great genius that “home-schooled/we-know-better-than-scientists” types tout him as.
And the mere fact that some experimenters today are bringing *new* technology to bear on the question of broadcast power–such as it is–doesn’t “vindicate” Tesla. He thought broadcast power using the technology of his day was viable and workable–which was just plain off the wall. It was dangerous and incredibly wasteful.
Edison was no saint, and I’m not saying he was superior to Tesla in any particular way–but at least Edison was a more stable sort and a practical businessman. Ruthless, perhaps, yes, and certainly shrewd. But also not the demon people are today painting him as.
53. Radioweezle - December 4th, 2007 at 10:01 am
LOL … What ever…
Perhaps you subscribe to the DC grid and the world is flat train of thought I guess.
I’ve had an Electical Engineering degree with a minor in petroleum engineering since the mid 60’s and have NEVER ran across a ‘Professional’ who shared the thought that Edison was a scientist but Telsa was a tinkerer.
ONCE AGAIN… check the facts…
Flip your light switch on, open your frig, push your microwave button…take a deep breath and think.. polyphase
Regardless.. It’s been a pleasure… have a great day.
54. Randall - December 4th, 2007 at 10:36 am
“…have NEVER ran across a ‘Professional’ who shared the thought that Edison was a scientist but Telsa was a tinkerer.”
Maybe… but I’ve run across lots of dishonest people who take someone’s words and twist them around when they can’t get the better side of an argument.
I never said “Edison was a scientist.” Those words never crossed my keyboard. Edison certainly was NOT a scientist.
And yes, Tesla was more of a scientist than Edison—but more than anything else he (Tesla) was a half-crackpot tinkerer.
The mere fact that he DID manage some useful and intelligent ideas in his early career does NOT alter the fact that later his ideas became whacked and off the wall.
55. Randall - December 4th, 2007 at 10:40 am
Another point in all this… it’s not so much the discrediting of Tesla that interests me—though I *do* find the near-cult-ish “thing” that’s grown up around Tesla in recent years to be downright silly—it’s the unreasonable dissing of Edison that is my focus here.
Edison was a businessman, a promoter, a synthesizer of ideas, a tinkerer, and yes—to some extent, an inventor. A scientist? No, not really. But a devil, a man whose memory we should now spit on? Come on.
An asshole, maybe. But I’d bet any of you that *most* of the men who’ve made the impact on our lives that Edison made, were also “assholes” to one extent or another.
56. Bonnie_ - December 4th, 2007 at 10:49 am
I don’t dislike Edison because I like and admire Tesla. Both are American heroes. They were rivals, but that doesn’t mean I have to choose between them. I can like them both!
America is all about people using the foundations of capitalism and freedom to create a profit for themselves — and incidentally, creating a better life for the people around them. Tesla’s genius runs the power to the light bulb that Edison’s genius perfected. Suits me fine.
57. Blogball - December 4th, 2007 at 3:58 pm
Judging by the tenor of the comments in this particular exchange it seems to me like Radioweezle has the personality most like Edison. I just hope Radioweezle is inventing something or improving on someone else’s invention to counterbalance this type of personality.
By the way Bonnie, I liked your comment
58. Bojana Videkanic - December 7th, 2007 at 5:01 am
I would like to add my two cents about Tesla. He always maintained his Serbian/Croatian ancestry and so he is Croatian greatest hero. He was a Serb born in a small village in the montains of Croatia. He is also one of my ancesters. He was very educated and yes he had problems (emotional) but so does most of people with his IQ. And Randall why does everything have to be measured through money. Edison was a shrewed bussinessman but we cannot compare him and Tesla. Tesla was never interested in making money. Not everything has to be about money and making millions of dollars. This is what really bothers me about the “myth” of the American dream.
59. Randall - December 7th, 2007 at 7:20 am
Bojana:
I never said this had anything to do with money nor did I imply it. You’re reading the issue into the debate because, apparently, it weighs on your mind.
I started this out defending Edison (lightly–I acknowledge Edison was no saint) from detractors who essentially want to demonize him. Tesla had nothing to do with that, and I had nothing to say about Tesla.
Someone *else* then came along and started in with the mythology surrounding Tesla and broadcast power, which I then proceeded to address. Two separate issues having nothing to do with each other.
Now, to address what *you’ve* said:
Tesla not interested in making money? Come now, Bojana…. now you’re just playing with the facts a bit. No, Tesla was not a ruthless businessman like Edison, nor was he a successful entrepreneur… but there’s ample evidence that on occasions he at least *tried* to be. It’s clear that he attempted to build business interest around his work, and wanted to make some money off of it. He didn’t, (and ended up destitute) in large part because he was totally lacking in business savvy and was also a tad unstable (which worsened over time).
It’s one thing to defend the man’s memory, which is laudable. But let’s not paint Tesla as some kind of altruist uttery disinterested in profiting from his work and discoveries.
60. davor - December 7th, 2007 at 9:34 am
Westinghouse came to Tesla and described the situation. Tesla replied with these words:
“Mr. Westinghouse, you have been my friend, you believed in me when others had no faith; you were brave enough to go ahead… when others lacked courage; you supported me when even your own engineers lacked vision… you have stood by me as a friend…
“Here is your contract, and here is my contract. I will tear both of them to pieces, and you will no longer have any troubles from my royalties. Is that sufficient?”
So much about Tesla being greedy.
Read the rest here: http://flyingmoose.org/truthfic/tesla.htm
61. Randall - December 7th, 2007 at 10:50 am
davor:
Read my words carefully. I NEVER described Tesla as “greedy.” I mean, this is ridiculous. Can’t people read and process information anymore?
First of all, one quote from one incident (the validity of which I can’t even confirm—the story could be apocryphal) does not make the man a saintly altruist utterly disinterested in making a buck. There is ample evidence that on many other occasions Tesla *was* trying to make some money from his work—on the page you yourself have provided the link to, it cites a story where Edison evidently promised Tesla $50,000 which Tesla then tried to collect.
AGAIN–no one said Tesla was greedy–I certainly didn’t say that. But Bojana made the statement that Tesla “was never interested in making money,” which is just plain false. THAT’S what I was addressing.
62. davor - December 7th, 2007 at 11:46 am
What Bojana and I both try to point out is that Tesla wasn’t a businessman but an inventor and his goal was not to make himself rich but to realize his ideas. Some of them were successful and some weren’t. Which is normal. There has never been an inventor or a scientist that didn’t make any errors or false presumptions an same can be said about Tesla. Than again you go too far dissing Tesla as a scientist. When you speak about him it sounds like he was just an electrician who happened to come across an invention that happened to change our world completely. Just because Tesla wasn’t a great physicist or mathematician doesn’t make him less scientific.
Also dissing Edison is clearly out of place. He was a great inventor and even better businessman. His ways are though by many seen as questionable.
We could say that he was a Bill Gates of his time, but he was also probably more inovative than Bill (and didn’t have help from his mom’s friends at IBM :).
No one is saying that making money is a bad thing, but there are bad ways. Of course Tesla tried to make money. He needed a way to finance his further research as well as for living. Not to make money on its own. That’s Biljana’s point.
When talking of Tesla and Edison the interesting episode is the year 1915 when they were to share Nobel prize together.
Why it hadn’t happened I don’t know. They say that beside sharing it with his “archenemy” Tesla was offended by Marocni’s not deserved prize.
Anyway I don’t intend to go to typing war with you.
63. alec - December 8th, 2007 at 4:22 am
All exposure of Thomas Edison as a fraud is much appreciated!
64. Randall - December 10th, 2007 at 9:54 am
davor:
“What Bojana and I both try to point out is that Tesla wasn’t a businessman but an inventor…”
Which I think is incorrect. I think the evidence is there to make a clear point that Tesla was very much interested in business—no, he wasn’t some kind of mogul like Edison, and almost certainly had no interest in being that. But I disagree with this portrait being painted of him as some altruistic inventor utterly disinterested in profit.
“…and his goal was not to make himself rich but to realize his ideas.”
And I think that statements like that border on cant.
What I’m resistant to is this idea that’s fashionable now of painting Tesla as the noble, selfless, altruistic inventor on the one hand (which I think ignores truth) and on the other hand, painting Edison as just some rapacious, uncouth, ruthless businessman who did no inventing of his own and just stole other people’s ideas. (Which clearly ignores truth).
The truth is, Edison was a tough business character, yes, but he also was an inventor and certainly improved ideas that otherwise might have gone nowhere. And Tesla, yes, displayed some brilliance and was certainly responsible for furthering what we know about electricity–but he was also foolish with the business end of things—not because he was disinterested in business, but rather because he wasn’t capable and was a bit unstable–which only worsened towards the end of his life. Moreover, he did not have a great grasp of the science he was delving into.
“Just because Tesla wasn’t a great physicist or mathematician doesn’t make him less scientific.”
Of course it does. When someone goes around saying Edison was a scientist, we don’t stand for it, because we know he wasn’t. Why then do we give a pass to Tesla, who clearly was either unwilling or unable to lend credence to the scientific knowledge of his day, (or wasn’t even aware of some of it) and wasted his time with crackpot ideas like broadcast power?
“Of course Tesla tried to make money. He needed a way to finance his further research as well as for living. Not to make money on its own. That’s Biljana’s point.”
But why make that point to *me*? I never said Tesla had ever tried to become a tycoon or a grand businessman like Edison.
We’re really arguing about nothing, or next to nothing.
65. Randall - December 10th, 2007 at 9:55 am
alec:
“All exposure of Thomas Edison as a fraud is much appreciated!”
Why? Why is it so important to make a fraud out of Edison? Because he *was* one? Where’s the evidence for this?
66. swampsnake - December 10th, 2007 at 1:02 pm
edison did not invent the lightbulb, true, he did invent the first practical one.
recorded sound others tried but he was the first to do it.
edison was a company and he knew it. a friend of mine made a plant growth food while working for hyponex did she get credit for it …no the company did. such is life.the same goes for goodrich , dupont, gm, ford, such is life when you work for someone else and sign away your rights to get the job.
67. Radioweezle - December 12th, 2007 at 4:25 pm
LOL.. geez you guys still going at it ???
Thought the subject was going to be dropped when I stopped replying. Well my mind was already made up on the facts any way.
Anyone want to take on the issues between De Forest, Armstrong and Sarnoff ??
68. Randall - December 13th, 2007 at 1:27 pm
Radioweezle:
“Well my mind was already made up on the facts any way.”
Yeah, that’s a great thing to admit to. Nice.
69. Radioweezle - December 15th, 2007 at 9:44 am
Randall:
Well it’s better to be safe in the knowledge of facts than to just go about ignoring the obvious.
So let’s just move on.
Oh BTW: happen to see the article aired on the History Channel regarding the ‘Tesla’ Car this past week, Modern Marvels I believe. Uses his induction motor with a total of 7 moving parts in the drivetrain. Just a comment, not an argument.
70. Alexandra - December 16th, 2007 at 6:03 pm
Ah, the story of Lady Godiva never fails to make me laugh. I remember when I was little my mum told me it, and I was gob smacked. I was tiny and I was like: “Why would she do that? Eww. No one wants to see naked people.”
I’m almost upset that its a myth.
Also, I had no idea that they weren’t burnt at the stake in Salem. I wonder what started that myth.
71. Radioweezle - December 25th, 2007 at 3:39 pm
Blogball said:
“Radioweezle has the personality most like Edison”
Well God I sure hope not. I try not to take credit for others ideas.
It appears that a very good exchange of opinions is taking place.
Doesn’t look like anything else I have to say would contribute more to this than what has already been said by others.
Edison and Tesla were both great men (listen Randall?) But… only one was a true educated scientist with a deep understanding of how it all worked.
“Can opened, worms everywhere” (ok so I did steal that tag line but I’m not marketing it)
72. Mark - December 27th, 2007 at 1:39 pm
My neighborhood is not overun with “crazy feminists.” Maybe they all went to live near Patrask. (His comment of 11/29/07 is really dumb.)
73. Allison - December 31st, 2007 at 11:04 pm
So Lizzie wasn’t guilty because a jury found her innocent?? By that rationale, OJ is innocent too. No, she had no blood on her dress, but she burned a so-called “paint-stained” dress a few days later. Also, the underskirt she gave the police, which she apparently thought to be clean, actually had a speck of blood on the hem. Now, she tried to blame this on it being “that time of the month”, but the fact is the blood was on the OUTSIDE of the skirt and only six inches from the hem. Also, the murder weapon, an axe head, WAS found. It was hidden in a box high up on a shelf in the basement but clearly had been recently used- the (presumably blood-stained) handle had been freshly broken off and the axe head had been coated w/ ashes to make it appear dusty. Would a crazed killer not living in the home put it there? And this is only a fraction of the evidence pointing to Lizzie’s guilt.
74. Bob - January 15th, 2008 at 5:10 pm
While we’re at it, how about the most common myth of all of this sort, namely that the ancients and/or medievals thought the world was flat. People knew the world was round since at least the classical Greek age. Washington Irving of Sleepy Hollow and Rip Van Winkle fame wrote a story about Columbus wherein he (Irving) feigned that Isabelle et al thought the world was flat. Ever since, oh-so-smart moderns have thought they had one up on those old “barbarians.” Even some idiot a few comments up alludes to this misconception. Who’s the barbarian then?
75. Tonny - January 23rd, 2008 at 10:18 pm
What? This list has no Chicago fire and the cow?
76. JCmac - January 31st, 2008 at 12:28 am
Interesting debate here.
Radioweezle:
“LOL.. geez you guys still going at it ???
Thought the subject was going to be dropped when I stopped replying. Well my mind was already made up on the facts any way.”
That is probably why you didn’t bother carefully reading Randall’s comments. I’ve seen how you were putting words into his mouth a couple of times. That is why you can’t digest the fact that someone who clearly knows more than you is trying to correct you. Your mind was already made up even before you had that debate.
davor:
“Anyway I don’t intend to go to typing war with you.”
Radioweezle, Bonnie and you seems to share the same habit of exaggeration. Just a small disagreement and conflict of ideas and you think this is akin to a typing/flame war? What are you a child? Randall was merely pointing out your inaccuracies, and you people invest so much emotion into your initial beliefs that you react vehemently. I guess this is what Randall calls the “pussification of society”.
77. JCmac - January 31st, 2008 at 12:29 am
Nice list btw. I’ve also been scouring over the other lists on this site. Very interesting. Kudos to whoever maintains these lists!
78. D300 - February 26th, 2008 at 2:07 pm
“While we’re at it, how about the most common myth of all of this sort, namely that the ancients and/or medievals thought the world was flat.”
Thanks for noting that Bob, I was going to bring that one up too!
Personally the ‘Flat Earth’ story has to be the most common and widely accepted historical myth. I’ve even seen a few Medieval history and history of science books till stating this myth as a fact.
Persoanlly I think the myth is still persistant because the story still serves a purpose for modern people.
79. Damian - February 29th, 2008 at 11:41 am
#1 by far: Creationism.
What is the difference between these two statements?
1) God is the creator of the unviverse.
2) God is a ham sandwich in my fridge.
Answer: Nothing
80. Ghidoran - March 2nd, 2008 at 5:58 pm
What about the fact that Queen Victoria never said ‘We are not amused’ when someone tried to entertain her, and that she actually wrote in her diary, “I was very much amused”? Also, I think during the French Revolution, there was the Queen in France who, when told that the people in her country had no bread to eat, said, “Then why don’t they eat cake?” Was it the same as no.3? Read it in one of my school history books.
81. spit my drink out - March 25th, 2008 at 5:49 pm
damian lol god is a ham sandwich? Brilliant!
82. avi - April 9th, 2008 at 4:50 pm
what about alexander graham bell invented the telephone
83. Rylan - April 20th, 2008 at 1:16 pm
“Unfortunately this myth rears its ugly head quite often, and often no amount of effort is sufficient to disprove it to the true believers.”
Not to say that Lizzie was definitely the murderer, but the sentence I quoted above suggests that there wasn’t reasonable evidence pointing to Lizzie’s guilt, which is far from the case.
84. kiwiboi - April 20th, 2008 at 1:52 pm
About #1 - England has a strong claim for having invented baseball. One of the earliest written references using the term “base-ball” (referring to the ball game) was in 1744, in an English childrens’ book by John Newberry (titled “A Little Pretty Pocket-Book”). This, of course, was before Doubleday was born.
Of course, there are even earlier English references, but none quite so explicit. Other variations of the game can, of course, be found in the literature/tales of other nations also.
An American guy I work with told me this, and I checked it out; seems he was right
85. rushfan - June 24th, 2008 at 8:35 pm
Wow. I knew #2 and #1, but all the rest are new to me. I blame my public school education.
86. Annunnakike - July 2nd, 2008 at 5:40 am
Nice list, just one little question though: (no, not about Edison
What is true about the socalled pope chair? Rumor has it that after the story with the female pope they made a chair with a hole in the seating, so that if a new pope was chosen they could inspect his genitals to see if he was really male. The Vatican denies the existence of this chair, probably to be able to deny the existence of the female pope…
87. spiralsnail - November 10th, 2008 at 1:50 am
Maybe Edison is not that guilty. Did he claim to have invented all these inventions? or did the Americans write history to their advantage. If he was an industrialist then he is partially innocent, BUT as an honourable man he should have given credit where it was due. Maybe it was cheaper stealing the ideas than buying them from their rightful inventors. I think it was the sign of the times, who can get there first, like the hundreds of archeologists and tourists who stole Egyptian artifacts under the pretence of protecting them when in fact, they caused more damage than anything else.