Myths and Misinterpretation in History

Share It.....
  • 1

 2,702 total views,  2 views today

French Revolution

Upsets are quite often romanticized as an occasion in a country’s history where the lower class individuals waged war against a brutish and dictator routine. However, as history has indicated us consistently, for a transformation to be effective, it in many cases requires something other than the working class. A similar thing can likewise be said about the French Revolution of 1789.

photo via wikipedia
The Storming of the Bastille, 14 July 1789

Clarifying the genuine causes and how the insurgency went down is something path past the extent of this rundown. By the by, the normal “information” is that ruined individuals started the insurgency. There were a few striking uprisings before the transformation, when the general population of Paris opposed the legislature.

In any case, unfailingly, the white collar class kept things from declining further. In 1789, be that as it may, things were extraordinary. The white collar class and lower honorability, themselves — disappointed with the high duties and dimensions of debasement — joined the everyday people. In this manner, fixing the destiny of the French government.


Individuals, overall, have a genuinely hopeful perspective on history. A large number of us like to feel that the past was a less difficult, more pleasant, and by and large better time. However, this is a typical misguided judgment so profoundly imbued into our basic awareness that even students of history now and again experience difficulty separating themselves from it. A considerable lot of us as a rule overlook exactly how war-ridden the world was or how little access a great many people needed to such a significant number of things that we underestimate today.

photo via wikipedia
Knights of Christ by Jan van Eyck

The motivation behind history is, or ought to be, to look at occasions and frameworks in the most target way that could be available. To perceive what worked and what didn’t, and how we can utilize those things to improve what’s to come. History shouldn’t be tied in with keeping track of who’s winning or feelings of spite, nor should we take a gander at it through a nostalgic focal point in order to all the more likely fit with our optimistic perspective.

One case of this is gallantry. Promoted by various medieval and present day books, stories, and epic lyrics, gallant knights are regularly observed as valiant, respectable, obliging men, characterized by their honorable thought, especially towards ladies. However, the fact of the matter is very extraordinary. The starting points of the term and idea stem back to the tenth century France. It was presented by the congregation as an endeavor at controlling the endemic savagery in French society. The term originates from chevalier, or knight, which thusly, gets from cheval, or steed.

In actuality, these knights were very vicious, with various records of sacking and looting towns, towns, religious communities, just as normally submitting demonstrations of homicide, torment, assault, etc. To put it plainly, valor developed to end up to some degree a set of principles in fighting and had nothing to do with what we presently think about gallant today.

Emperor Nero

For a whole week in 64 AD, the subjects of Ancient Rome observed defenselessly as their city consumed to the ground. Likewise with numerous comparable catastrophes, conventional individuals who’ve lost everything frequently search for somebody to fault.

photo via wikipedia
An 1815 illustration of the alleged tomb of Nero; actually tomb of proconsul Caius Vibius Marianus.

Old stories state that Nero, himself, set flame to the city, after which he got on the city dividers and started playing the fiddle and presenting departed ballads about the obliteration of Troy. Honestly, Emperor Nero was not an especially decent man. Going from mercilessness to inbreeding, murder, and so forth, Nero is considered by numerous individuals to be the Biblical Antichrist.

Be that as it may, with regards to the flame of 64 AD, Nero didn’t sit inactively by or play his instrument as the city consumed. He was really at his Palace in Antium when the flame started. At the point when news contacted him, Nero surged back to the city where he by and by composed the firefighting endeavors amid the primary night. He likewise opened every open building and his own private greenery enclosures to go about as brief havens. Moreover, Nero imported grain from every single close-by city and offered it to the subjects at just a small amount of the expense.


There’s a typical confusion that Napoleon Bonaparte was truly short in stature. This fantasy is so instilled in the present aggregate awareness that we even have a mental issue named after it: the Napoleon Complex. This kind of feeling of inadequacy shows itself in some shorter individuals, especially men, where they want to overcompensate by displaying forceful as well as oppressive social conduct.

photo via wikipedia

To the extent the genuine Napoleon was concerned, he was 5-foot-2, to be precise. That is not especially tall. In any case, the truth is that he wasn’t shorter than the normal Frenchman from the late eighteenth and mid nineteenth hundreds of years. All in all, why all the object about his tallness, at that point? The appropriate response lies in the contrast between the estimating frameworks of France and England at the time. The two countries utilized creeps in their estimations, however the French inch was longer than its British partner.

Truly, Napoleon was 5-foot-6 in British inches and 5-foot-2 in French. Eventually, a disarray was made, and individuals began trusting that Napoleon was 5-foot-2 in British inches. To exacerbate the situation, Napoleon was regularly encompassed by taller gatekeepers, influencing him to appear to be littler by correlation. Be that as it may, the Imperial Guard had tallness necessities, which represent Napoleon’s byname of le petit caporal or the little corporal.

Hernan Cortes

At its stature amid the mid sixteenth century, the Aztec Empire figured out how to cover a lot of what is currently focal Mexico. It enveloped a territory of more than 52,000 square miles and a populace of around 11 million. In spite of the fact that moderately youthful, the Mesoamerican country figured out how to accumulate a ton of riches and grow its scope in a short measure of time. This, in any case, likewise pulled in a great deal of disdain from the general population they oppressed, just as the consideration of the Europeans positioned in Cuba.

photo via wikipedia
Cortés scuttling his own fleet off the coast of Veracruz in order to eliminate the possibility of retreat.

Hearing reports of bizarre stone landmarks and splendidly dressed and brilliant secured locals on the territory, the Spanish Governor of Cuba, Diego Velasquez, sorted out a campaign included an armada of 11 ships, 500 troopers, and 100 mariners. At the leader of this endeavor was Hernan Cortes. Also, despite the fact that the endeavor was later dropped, Cortes cruised to the territory at any rate.

The chronicled legend encompassing Hernan Cortes is that he, nearby his men, figured out how to push the forceful Aztec Empire to the brink of collapse without anyone else. Frankly, they were brandishing best in class weapons, for example, crossbows, steel swords, firearms, pikes, guns, and full plate protection. They likewise had steeds, something which the locals had never experienced. These weapons made the Spanish hundreds, if not a huge number of years ahead mechanically, demonstrating their value on numerous occasions on the front line — mostly as resolve breakers for the adversary.

In any case, this would not have been sufficient to cut down an Empire — let alone in a timespan of only three years. It was by utilizing the assistance of a few oppressed clans and their armed forces, just as smallpox that was presented quite a long while prior that figured out how to carry out the responsibility — nearby Cortez and his vigorously outfitted men, obviously.

Vincent van Gogh

Numerous individuals around the globe have seen Vincent van Gogh’s Self-Portrait with Bandaged Ear. He painted it not long after coming back from the clinic in 1889. The official form of the story is that, in an attack of frenzy, the irritated Dutch painter separated his left ear cartilage with an extremely sharp edge without further ado before Christmas 1888. He at that point enveloped it by a pieced of paper or fabric, strolled to a close-by massage parlor and gave it to a whore, who quickly blacked out.

A head and shoulders portrait of a thirty something man, with a red beard, facing to the left
photo via wikipedia
Self-Portrait, 1887, Art Institute of Chicago

He at that point returned home, rested and nearly seeped to death before the police discovered him the following morning in a blood-soaked bed. Being oblivious, he was taken to the emergency clinic. When he woke up, van Gogh requested his companion, the French craftsman Paul Gauguin, who wouldn’t see him.

All things considered, two German history specialists have proposed an alternate form of occasions. The two contended that, in the wake of investigating various observer records and letters, the official story had a lot of irregularities. Their elucidation focuses to Paul Gauguin, van Gogh’s companion, who was a sharp fencer and, amid a warmed contention, cut off his ear cartilage with a sword. The two made an alleged agreement of quietness where Gauguin was hoping to stay away from arraignment while van Gogh needed to keep his companion, with whom he was beguiled.

A to some degree ongoing revelation, be that as it may, appears to negate (or possibly essentially adjust) both the first form and the one proposed by the two German antiquarians. A letter composed by Dr. Felix Rey clarifies in full detail the degree of the injuries. For reasons unknown, the whole left ear was cut off, not simply the ear cartilage, as it was recently expected.