Customer Reviews

History's Greatest Lies: The Startling Truths Behind World Events our History Books Got Wrong

5 star:		(17)
4 star:		(20)
3 star:		(12)
2 star:		(5)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

History's Greatest Lies: The Startling Truth Behind World Events Our History Books Got Wrong. The problem is that the title is wrong. There are three main areas that the author rather too generously calls "history books". The first is folklore: folklore is not the same as history by any means. The second is media image: this is also not the same as history. Then, of course, there's actual history-book type history, and here I'm talking about mainstream history, not the propaganda put out by Muslim terrorist groups, the Klan, etc. One of the more egregious examples cited in the book is the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. You can indeed find this in lots of history books--but as an example of forgery and antisemitism. To say that history books got this wrong is to suggest that the forgery is indeed true--which is not at all what the author intends. Weir notes that a number of well-known people, including Henry Ford, believed the Protocols to be true. But by the same token, Arthur Conan Doyle believed in fairies and spiritualism, and at least one former US president believed in astrology--but so what? There are people who believe the Earth is flat, but that hardly qualifies as one of "history's greatest lies" and inclusion in this book.

A lot of the episodes in the book are folklore--such as Robert the Bruce and the spider: this children's tale doesn't qualify as history. History books have shown that the Bastille housed very few prisoners (and housed them quite comfortably, thank you): you are unlikely to find any history book (other than, say, Stalinist propaganda) that claims otherwise. But from the title of the book you could get the impression that you're getting a real revelation here, and that current history books say that the Bastille was an Abu Graib of its day.

Folklore and media imagery blend together in some of the tales of the American West. Jesse James can be seen in some movies as a heroic and noble character--a kind of Robin Hood. But movies and TV shows are not history books. The Earp gang in Tombstone is another example cited in the book--but history books have not treated the Earps kindly at all--at least not to the extent as portraying them as law-abiding and honest lawmen. Look at the entries in Wikipedia for Jesse James and Wyatt Earp--you'll see plenty of blemishes. Movies and TV usually like to have characters drawn in black and white: the good guys are good--very good, and the bad guys are bad--very bad. Someone like Tony Soprano is too confusing! I remember an episode of Richard Boone's Have Gun Will Travel back about 1960, which featured (in just the one episode) a black cowboy. This episode produced a veritable Noah's Flood of angry letters saying that this was totally unrealistic--that there weren't any black cowboys. Of course, there were indeed plenty of black cowboys--but not in the TV and movie westerns at that time, so the public assumed that they didn't exist. Folklore, media imagery, and history are not the same animal: debunking media imagery doesn't qualify as exposing one of history's greatest lies.

There are some chapters in the book which can be categorized as being actual history: some of these are interesting and worthy of inclusion, although the questions remain about who is right--history or the author.

Disclosure: I received a review copy of this book.

You could say that a historian's job is to wade into the raw sewage of history and try to come back with a sample of pure untainted water. It's a challenge with the effects of the passage of time, interpretation and opinion polluting the water of truth. William Weir's HISTORY'S GREATEST LIES: THE STARTLING TRUTHS BEHIND WORLD EVENTS OUR HISTORY BOOKS GOT WRONG focuses on key figures/moments in history that are common knowledge that are also common myths. I wouldn't call the events that Weir tells us about as being lies per se but myths that have occurred due to biased views and publicity (with the exception of Wyatt Earp where Earp and his biographer clearly meant to deceive the public).


The key events and people that Weir focuses on are the burning of Rome & Nero's role in it, the Robin Hood myth associated with Jesse James, Wyatt Earp's attempt to white wash his role and the events at the OK Corral, Rhames II's earl example of "spin doctoring" in Egypt and the retelling of other historical occurances that were butchered/altered with the passage of time.

Weir then goes back, examines the sleight-of-hand that some of these key figures have used to bolster their reputations and/or miscoceptions that were popularized by other writers. For example, Nero didn't fiddle while Rome was burning because the violin wasn't invented until the 16th century. While he wanted to rebuild Rome and rumors floated around at the time in the senate that he started the great fire of Rome, he didn't and was, in fact, behind a great deal of building that added to Rome's luster. Jesse James was a paranoid, vicious killer NOT a Robin Hood who gave back to the poor. Wyatt Earp, his brothers and Doc Holiday shot the Clanton's some of whom were unarmed and while the Clanton's weren't sqeaky clean, neither was Earp who tried to convince Clanton to fake a robbery to help Earp get elected sheriff. He also separated from his common law wife in favor of of actress/department store heir Julie Marcus.

History, like comedy, isn't pretty (to paraphrase Steve Martin)but the facts behind the myths are often far more fascinating than the myths themselves. Weir's book is quite good focusing on a few myths and correcting them but I was a bit disappointed that he didn't tackle a wide variety of other myths including those associated with contemporary history (such as World War II, the Civil War, etc.). Weir's prose is breezy and inviting never taking for granted the intelligence of his readers.

HISTORY'S GREATEST LIES: THE STARTLING TRUTHS BEHIND WORLD EVENTS OUR HISTORY BOOKS GOT WRONG is a well written good book but I do wish that he had focused but that's no fault of Weir--that was just my expectation that he would cast a bigger net to capture a wider variety of urban myths posing as history.

This coffee table book is nicely designed with terrific illustrations, side bars on various people from history related to the events that he focuses on. If you're looking for gossip about historical figures this would be the wrong book but if you're looking to learn the truth about key figures from history often poorly painted in novels, films and other history books, you'll enjoy Weir's trip into the river of history.

Though `History's Greatest Lies' is an inspired title, this book by William Weir has two of the classic hallmarks of a book that was hurriedly written to meet a publisher's deadline.

Firstly, it is riddled with mistakes that not even a first year history major would have made. For a supposedly top quality history publication, this is unforgivable. Three examples will suffice to give a sense of how sloppy the research has been. In the Battle of Kadesh chapter, it is stated that Rameses II was the longest reigning pharaoh of ancient Egypt, at some 67 years. Even a cursory glance at any mainstream pharaoh list will quickly show that Egypt's longest reigning pharaoh was Pepi II, reigning for 94 years.

In the Nero chapter, it states that Caligula was assassinated in 49 A.D. Again, any decent revision of the text would have highlighted that Caligula was assassinated in 41 A.D. Finally, the claim that Nero was the only emperor who was declared a public enemy by the Senate. Well, he was... if you ignore Maximus, Didius Julianus, Albinus or Maxentius...

And so on and so forth.

The second clear sign of a hurried development cycle is the selection of historical events that have been described as history's greatest lies. One would be hard pressed to identify exactly how Lasseter's Reef, or Dillinger's death were earth shattering enough, revolutionary enough, or frankly even interesting enough to make a list of history's greatest lies. For more modern examples how about Watergate or Weapons of Mass Destruction... or even John F. Kennedy's stage managed Camalot façade?

No, my sense with this book is of an opportunity well and truly wasted. My advice, don't waste your money on it and wait for someone else to come along and take a shot at it.

William Weir is very clever. He has given his book "History's Greatest Lies" a very intriguing title. He doesn't use the term "myth" on the cover, since that is not "sexy" enough. He uses the very strong word, "lies," and he throws it up there in a huge font. I'll admit, I was hooked by the title. I have an amateur interest in history, and I'm always fascinated by learning that well-known details about historical events I've always taken for granted as truth, are in fact completely wrong. It is a great for conversation when you can inform people that no, witches were never burned in Salem in the 17th century (they were all hanged), Thomas Edison did not invent the light bulb (22 other men had patents for "incandescent lamps" prior to this), and Eve did not necessarily eat an apple (it is only referred to as "fruit" in the bible). As I said, these kinds of details fascinate me, so I assumed "Lies" would be right up my alley.

The book is very well produced. It is paperback, but uses high quality card thick paper, with nice illustrations, and a heavy fold out cover. It is divided into 15 chapters (Amazon's description incorrectly states 15-30 chapters). Each begins with 4-5 paragraph introduction, followed by a text box which displays the "lie" (referred to as a "myth" in the book), and below that a short summary of why the "lie" is incorrect. The chapter index doesn't really explain what are the specific myths, so I will list them verbatim below

1. The Emperor Nero played the fiddle while Rome burned.
2. Ramesses II alone defeated the Hittite Army in the Battle of Kadesh.
3. The Goths were hairy, grunting savages whose sole existence revolved around destroying whatever lay in their path, including the Roman Empire.
4. The perseverance of a little spider inspired Robert the Bruce to emerge from his hideout and defeat the invading English in the War for Scottish Independence.
5. Hernán Cortés was a monster responsible for the massacre that followed the Fall of Tenochtitlán, the Aztec capital.
6. The physicist Galileo was condemned and imprisoned by the Roman Catholic Church because his work conflicted with the teachings of the Bible.
7. During his midnight ride in 1775, Paul Revere warned the local militia in Massachusetts of the coming of the British.
8. The Bastille was a bastion of torture, evil, and political oppression, where innocent citizens were held by the tyrant Louis XVI.
9. Jesse James was an American version of Robin Hood, stealing from the rich and giving to the poor.
10. Lawman Wyatt Earp and his friends wiped out the Clanton-McLaury Gang of cattle rustlers who had been terrorizing the town of Tombstone, Arizona, in 1881.
11. The Phillipine War of 1899-1902 was an insurrection, and the United States' enemies were the savage "unstoppable" Muslims called Moros.
12. The "Protocols" Outline a Jewish conspiracy to take over the world.
13. Lewis Harold Bell "Harry" Lasseter claimed he found a fabulous reef of gold while lost in the Australian Outback in 1897. He was never able to relocate the reef. No one has ever found the gold, though many have tried.
14. Notorious gangster John Dillinger was shot and killed outside the Biograph Theater in Chicago on July 22, 1934.
15. Afghanistan has always been a county impossible to conquer.

I wish I had had this list before ordering the book, because if I could see the subject matter, I might not be as apt to purchase it. In my opinion, very few of these have I ever even heard of, and even fewer am I actually interested in. I have a decent knowledge of history, but I'm fairly young, and I would consider my knowledge of world history maybe slightly higher than the average American's. I don't find half of these events noteworthy. A good 25% of them are not even really myths, and probably 20% of Mr. Weir's "truths" are not even facts, but opinions. For instance:

4. This sounds like a children's tale. Since I'm not European, I have never heard of this tale regarding Robert the Bruce, but upon hearing it, it sounds the same as the old "Washington chopped down a cherry tree" myth. I doubt many people in Scotland really believe this actually happened.
5. I know who Cortés was, but I have never heard of the Fall of Tenochtitlán before.
6. Weir states that the "reality" was that Galileo's trial for heresy was the culmination of a campaign to discredit him by his enemies and inflamed by Galileo's own hubris. Well sure, maybe that's the culmination of his trial, but it doesn't change the fact that he was still imprisoned for heresy.
7. Weir's reality regarding Paul Revere is that "before Revere was able to warn the militia, he was captured by the British." Okay, I never knew that. It still doesn't change the FACT that Paul Revere DID warn the local Massachusetts militia of a British invasion. That is not a "myth," as Weir claims. It is interesting that Revere was one of several riders, and there are much more to the details of his ride than most people probably know about, but he did still warn of the British invasion. How is that a "lie?"
9. I don't imagine anyone actually considers Jesse James as "an American Robin Hood." If I stopped 10 people on the street I doubt any of them actually believe that Jesse James gave money to the poor. Where is Weir coming up with these myths?
10. Being a fan of Tombstone, this is maybe one "myth" that Weir convinced me of. However, the only reality that is really noteworthy is that Earp did not "wipe out" the entire gang. They did still kill several rustlers at the OK Corral. The additional details however make this one of the only really interesting facts I will take out of this book and remember.
13. I have never heard of, and don't really care about some Australian guy who claimed to find treasure. I hardly consider that a noteworthy historical event from the last 100 years, much less, "history." How did Weir decide this was one of "history's greatest lies?" Is this huge in Australia or something? I would think El Dorado would be bigger than this.
14. Now this one is just ridiculous and where I stopped reading the book. Weir cites Dillinger's death as the "myth." He states the reality is that "many people no longer believe it was Dillinger who was killed, but a small-time criminal named Jimmy Lawrence." He doesn't even say it WASN'T Dillinger, he says that "many people" believe it wasn't. What kind of stupid reality is that? Unless you are prepared to unequivocally state that Dillinger was not shot, then provide evidence to support this, I do not consider his death to be a "lie."

There is a huge amount of potential with the subject matter for a book entitled "History's Greatest Lies." Unfortunately, Weir picks all of the wrong subjects, and then does an awful job at presenting them. The chapters were too long. Weir starts a chapter with the myth, supposedly debunks it by page 2, then spends the next 10 pages discussing related, but not relevant information. It's like if I used page one to explain that Nero did not actually play a fiddle while Rome burned, then on pages 2-10 said "oh yeah, and here's some other information about Nero and his life, but it doesn't really have much to do with the actual myth." You will be much more intrigued by looking up each of these subjects on Wikipedia. This is probably the only instance where I have ever read a book and thought that I could have done a better job writing it. I would suggest any potential readers not be taken in by the title, and perhaps read a sample of the book on Google Books first (they have a large amount of it available). And if you have an interest in American myths, pick up the much better A People's History of the United States: 1492 to Present (P.S.) instead.

This book is not what I expected. Each chapter is devoted to a single historical topic, and then the author attempts to demonstrate how a preconceived notion about that topic is a lie. The problem with this concept is that, for the most part, the "lie" is so miniscule and insignificant that it really doesn't affect the outcome of what you believe is factual. It doesn't affect the overall topic or event.

The topics selected by the author aren't necessarily compelling or interesting, either.

What is there to like about this book? Quite a bit, actually -- if you're a fan of history. Each chapter is chock-full of historical information. In addition to the chapter text, some chapters contain separate "aside" content, reminding me of a history textbook. This additional information is a good distraction from the main content. The chapters are appropriately illustrated; none of them are masterpieces, but they help illustrate the content.

What you actually enjoy in this book depends upon your own interests. My own interests are centered in the ancient and medieval world, but there were only a few chapters devoted to such content. As you're reading, you'll find that there are some topics about which you know nothing -- so it does become a new learning experience. However, I wish that the differences between "fact" and "lie" were much broader.

When I first see a title like "History's Greatest Lies", my first thought is, "Is this a conspiracy book?" Or, "Is it politically motivated propaganda?" Thankfully, it is neither. This book takes a neutral, historical look at what are not so much lies, but myths that have grown up around historical events over the last 3000+ years. Author William Weir covers 15 diverse subjects including Nero fiddling while Rome burned, Ramesses II, the Goths, Galileo's heresy trial, Robert the Bruce, Paul Revere, and Wyatt Earp. Weir not only blows the myths away but also gives you the history of what led up to the events and their aftermath.

Most interesting and informative to me were the chapters on the Conquistador Hernan Cortez, Galileo's heresy trial, the storming of the Bastille, and the Philippine Insurrection. The first three I thought I knew and the last was completely new to me. And while I learned nothing new about Nero, The Goths, Paul Revere, or Jesse James, I still found these chapters quite interesting. The main reason for this is Weir's easy to read writing style. It is not dry reading as some history books can be. Weir tells a good story.

The final section of the book, on more modern events, titled "Lies From Just Yesterday", is a little strange, though. The first and last chapters on the Philippine Insurrection and Afghanistan are fine, but then we get into the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Yes, these were a fake, but they are a known fake and have been know to be fake for decades. Of course, this is taking a western world view of the subject, as they are still taught as fact in some middle eastern countries. Quite an interesting subject, though, if you've never heard of the Protocols before.

Next up is Harold Lasseter and his Reef of Gold. Maybe of interest to Australians, but in reading the book, it seems that most people realize he was a fake, so I do not understand the inclusion. Next up is a subject I have read quite a bit about in the last few months, the death of John Dillinger. This is the one chapter where the sounds of a conspiracy theory can be heard.

With only 15 chapters, not every historical lie or myth could be covered. I would have liked to seen a chapter on Christopher Columbus and one on slavery in the new world, as what we've been taught in school about these subjects and the truth don't always match up.

Even with the faults I've outlined above, I recommend this book to anyone interested in the events covered in the book, or history in general. It may fill in a gap in your knowledge of the subject or may just inspire you to delve deeper into that person or event.

I'd first like to state that I am no history buff. I studied American and European history in college, and studied music history for one and one-half years but I would be hard-pressed to accurately recall much any of it now. I am basically a typically college-educated, non-history major person. However, I have always been the type to suspect just about everything told to me by "authority figures" and I encourage everyone to question the sources of information they take for granted, or believe to be true simply because a teacher/preacher or someone who appeared powerful told them it was true.

The first thing I checked out in this book was it's bibliography page. I need to have access to the same information the author used just in case I want to check for myself the authenticity of his claims. I was satisfied concerning the list of sources used. The book itself is a very interesting read, similar to a text book, but clearly not a text book. Plenty of photographs and drawings/sketches were included so I was able to get a more accurate grasp of life in the time period (ranging from ancient Rome to today's Afghanistan) being discussed. The section in Chapter 6 about Galileo was fascinating. I won't go into details lest I spoil it for you, but I enjoy knowing a lot more background information that was previously untold or unknown. I had always esteemed Galileo not only as an intellect, but also as an outstanding member of society. I was surprised that he had such a checkered past! And what the Romans did to the Christians after the great fire of Rome - Oh My God!

Though it is quite impossible to cover several hundred years of inaccurate history in 265 pages, this book covers many major recorded historical errors that have been spoon-fed to school children generation after generation for years. I will insist my children read this book and others like it which debunk previously held historical truths because I strongly feel that the best way to understand our present, and to navigate our future is to thoroughly understand our past. And our past must be based on the truth no matter how ugly it may appear.

This book is more along the lines of:
Mendacities, Mistruths, Myths, and Misconceptions.

These are the chapters and what I suggest for titles:
Nero - did he fiddle?
Ramesses II - un-beatable or spinner of yarns?
The Goths - Uncivilized or just slandered?
Robert the Bruce -- Inspired by a spider?
Cortes -- Butcher or Bio-terrorist?
Galileo - tortured Heretic or just ahead of his time?
Paul Revere -- poetry in motion or midnight ride of many?
The Bastille - was it really that bad?
Jesse James - zero or hero?
Wyatt Earp & Co. - opportunist or idealist?
The Philippines - why were we there, again?
Elders of Zion - reality or fantasy?
Lasseter's Mother Lode - dream or delirium?
John Dillinger -- killed by G-men, or was it a look-alike?
Afghanistan - unconquerable or un-holdable?

It has many good and memorable graphics from history. Each chapter has a myth / reality sidebar that summarizes the question. There are many sidebar discussions that are very interesting. There is a bibliography, but no footnotes, so you can't always tell which source is being used for which point.

The author is a life-long journalist and he also served in the US Army. He has written many books about military history, and this one is fairly true to form. Most of the stories are about mankind's conflicts or leaders of various levels and their pride. Because of these `larger than life' personalities, there are myths and legends that grow in association with their reputation. I'm no scholar of history, so I can't comment on the accuracy of the analysis, but I think the book, overall is good. And it would be good to have on the coffee table...

You might consider also reading:
Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong or Don't Know Much About History - Updated and Revised Edition or even for more trivial / short subjects - Uncle John's Bathroom Reader Plunges into History (Uncle John Presents)
Enjoy reading about history!

I have grown accustomed to various types of what are commonly referred to as `Bathroom Readers,' books made up of very brief pieces on a variety of provocative subjects. Short attention span consumption for the reader with minutes to explore, superficially, some subject of interest. I must confess that when I saw the title of this book, "History's Greatest Lies," this is what I expected. Some kind of broad compendium of brief commentaries and fact lists on the subject of the title. I could have been neither more surprised nor more pleased.

This is not one of those World Almanac-type quick reference guides to hundreds of well known (and less well known) deceptions, misunderstandings and plain old outright lies perpetuated by the tellers and retellers of human history.

On the contrary, William Weir has selected a total of 15 events in history and has examined the lies and perhaps non-deliberate inaccuracies in the way they have come down to us in the present as `history.' Each section is thorough and engaging, covering many aspects of the subject at hand. Whether or not the reader begins with a special interest in the particular subjects Weir has chosen to concentrate on, one cannot help but be swept up in the intricacies and human foibles, intentions and miscues that have resulted in history having been incorrectly recorder and recalled.

His chosen subjects include 1) The Emperor Nero, 2) Ramesses II, 3) The Goths, 4) Robert The Bruce, 5) Hernán Cortés, 6) Galileo, 7) Paul Revere, 8) The Bastille, 9) Jesse James, 10) The Earp Gang, 11) The Philippine Insurrection, 12) "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion," 13) Harold Lassiter, 14) John Dillinger and 15) Afghanistan. From ancient Egypt, Rome and Europe to modern Afghanistan, the choices may not be the ones you would have chosen as being representative of historical misrepresentation, but they do quite nicely

As an example of Weir's effort, let's consider his presentation on the Bastille - The French prison every school child knows was stormed during the French Revolution freeing the prisoners incarcerated therein. Well, Weir begins with a Myth vs. Reality statement. In this case, the myth is "The Bastille was a bastion of torture, evil, and political oppression, where innocent citizens were held by the tyrant Louis XVI." He says the reality is that: "Only seven prisoners were held in the Bastille, where they lived in relative comfort and ease." This gets your attention.

He goes on to document, quoting historically reliable sources, to discuss many aspects of the Bastille and it's misreported role in history including its beginnings, the quality of live for its prisoners, Louis XVI as a Bastille `reformer!' and the actual historical significance of both the structure and the famous event. Each chapter is covered in this kind of depth and each is richly illustrated with historical renderings of people and events.

This book is not for everyone. Devotees of brief two-page summaries will be disappointed and readers of more thorough socio-histories like those of Will and Ariel Durant may not find this representative sampling of events either satisfying or representative. For those of us in the middle, who can enjoy learning a lot more about some things we thought we already knew about, "History's Greatest Lies" will be a welcome and enjoyed addition to your home library.

Length:: 3:29 Mins

History defines us. It sets the stage for our future.

History is also a big fat lie.

Join me as we explore some of history's most famous lies. You just might learn a thing or two. But if nothing else, you can go back to your 10 year high school reunion and tell your history teacher what a silly fool they were.

Cheers!