Which Historical Figure(s) does Pop Culture do the least credit?

[F.F.C._fritz]

I am going to throw it out there for discussion, but I feel the Teutonic Knights are not given enough positive credit, typically being vilified.  However, they were just like any other state of the time period in terms of brutality.  At their height they had a rather wealthy and advanced state for the time period. 

It seems like most of the bad press comes from modern (post 19th century) Slavic written or film sources and primarily due to contemporary tensions with Germanic peoples and an urge to formulate an idea that it was a chronic issue with them (the Germanic peoples).

While you're surely right, it must be said that the opposite happened too, a lot.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tannenberg_Memorial
It's 19th/early 20th century romanticism/nationalism, baby!

Talking about brutality, anyway, war in the baltic area seems to be a bit more cruel than the typical war you'd have had inside Christendom. Those were generally not big wars (as often in the Middle Ages) but if you read the "Chronicon Livoniae" by Henry of Livonia (which is about and was written before the Teutonic Knights kicked in, anyway) you'll get an horrifying, repetitive litany of villages burned with their males massacred and women and children enslaved. To the negative image of the TK you may also want to add the "noble savage" myth which is often applied to the baltic tribes, comparing the western expansion in the area to the colonization of south and north America. The fact that many seems to forget is that the atrocities were unilateral and that the Baltic Lands were not really Eden on earth before the first western missionaries and settlers came.

This will surely be an interesting read on "victimization":
http://department.monm.edu/history/urban/articles/VictimsBalticCrusade.htm

 

[Untitled.]

Gengis Khan not famous? Yeah, go tell ol' John.

隐藏

More proof Genghis Khan was Germanic Turkic master race.

 

[Skot the Sanguine]

隐藏

I am going to throw it out there for discussion, but I feel the Teutonic Knights are not given enough positive credit, typically being vilified.  However, they were just like any other state of the time period in terms of brutality.  At their height they had a rather wealthy and advanced state for the time period. 

It seems like most of the bad press comes from modern (post 19th century) Slavic written or film sources and primarily due to contemporary tensions with Germanic peoples and an urge to formulate an idea that it was a chronic issue with them (the Germanic peoples).

While you're surely right, it must be said that the opposite happened too, a lot.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tannenberg_Memorial
It's 19th/early 20th century romanticism/nationalism, baby!

Talking about brutality, anyway, war in the baltic area seems to be a bit more cruel than the typical war you'd have had inside Christendom. Those were generally not big wars (as often in the Middle Ages) but if you read the "Chronicon Livoniae" by Henry of Livonia (which is about and was written before the Teutonic Knights kicked in, anyway) you'll get an horrifying, repetitive litany of villages burned with their males massacred and women and children enslaved. To the negative image of the TK you may also want to add the "noble savage" myth which is often applied to the baltic tribes, comparing the western expansion in the area to the colonization of south and north America. The fact that many seems to forget is that the atrocities were unilateral and that the Baltic Lands were not really Eden on earth before the first western missionaries and settlers came.

This will surely be an interesting read on "victimization":
http://department.monm.edu/history/urban/articles/VictimsBalticCrusade.htm

In fairness the Livonia Chronicles were dealing with the Swordbrothers, who were rather notoriously brutal.  They were also the driving force behind the whole Lake Peipus/Novgorod disaster (ex-members who were absorbed into the Teutonic Knights were still pushing for such a movement).

That William Urban article is very good.  I am a fan of his writing, he was also very kind to answer some historical questions I had about the Teutonic Knights' clothing and gear when I was researching my own harness of armor (though admittedly I went a-historical for my gauntlets).

 

[F.F.C._fritz]

隐藏

I am going to throw it out there for discussion, but I feel the Teutonic Knights are not given enough positive credit, typically being vilified.  However, they were just like any other state of the time period in terms of brutality.  At their height they had a rather wealthy and advanced state for the time period. 

It seems like most of the bad press comes from modern (post 19th century) Slavic written or film sources and primarily due to contemporary tensions with Germanic peoples and an urge to formulate an idea that it was a chronic issue with them (the Germanic peoples).

While you're surely right, it must be said that the opposite happened too, a lot.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tannenberg_Memorial
It's 19th/early 20th century romanticism/nationalism, baby!

Talking about brutality, anyway, war in the baltic area seems to be a bit more cruel than the typical war you'd have had inside Christendom. Those were generally not big wars (as often in the Middle Ages) but if you read the "Chronicon Livoniae" by Henry of Livonia (which is about and was written before the Teutonic Knights kicked in, anyway) you'll get an horrifying, repetitive litany of villages burned with their males massacred and women and children enslaved. To the negative image of the TK you may also want to add the "noble savage" myth which is often applied to the baltic tribes, comparing the western expansion in the area to the colonization of south and north America. The fact that many seems to forget is that the atrocities were unilateral and that the Baltic Lands were not really Eden on earth before the first western missionaries and settlers came.

This will surely be an interesting read on "victimization":
http://department.monm.edu/history/urban/articles/VictimsBalticCrusade.htm

In fairness the Livonia Chronicles were dealing with the Swordbrothers, who were rather notoriously brutal.  They were also the driving force behind the whole Lake Peipus/Novgorod disaster (ex-members who were absorbed into the Teutonic Knights were still pushing for such a movement).

That William Urban article is very good.  I am a fan of his writing, he was also very kind to answer some historical questions I had about the Teutonic Knights' clothing and gear when I was researching my own harness of armor (though admittedly I went a-historical for my gauntlets).

Yeah, Swordbrothers ain't exactly the same thing, still the Livonia Chronicles is fair enough a good description of what warfare was like (and how brutal it was) back then in that area. It's not like the Great Prussian Uprising or XIV century Reisen were less brutal in any way. Unfortunately I haven't read the primary sources (the Livonian Rhymed Chronicle), that's what I remember from my readings. I'm totally agreeing with you on Urban.

Anyway, nationalism/romanticism has created many false myths (which are still believed and exploited by pop culture) on the middle ages, as I stated in an earlier post here, the one about the evul Teutonic against the noble Slavs/Balts, or the other about the heroic Germanic Drang nach Osten supposedly started by the heroic teutons against the primitive slavs/balts are just two of a longer series.

 

[Bohemond Chesne]

Yeah the Napoleonic Russians get the short end of the media stick. The only real mention I can think of is in the Hornblower Books.. in which they are largely useless if not being lead by the civilised English captain.

Still great books though.

 

[Captured Joe]

War & Peace.

Philistine.


(Compare them with how media handles Napoleonic Bavarians, Württembergians, Danes, Saxons, Montenegrins and Austrians...)

 

[Patchouli Knowledge]

In the English-speaking world, the Russians (or Napoleon's invasion of their country) usually get almost all the credit for the collapse of the First French Empire.

 

[Captured Joe]

I thought that were the (actually quite few) British at Waterloo?

 

[Leifr Eiríksson]

Trafalgar seems to me as being the ultimate British victory* over the French and Spanish, our mortal enemies upon the continent. Waterloo is nice and all but it doesn't really lend itself to our naval traditions and heritage. 

*As an Englishman.

Nor does Wellington have anything as grand and iconic as this attributed to him.

隐藏

 

[noosers]

Apart from that Blücher saved his sorry hide at Waterloo, Wellington wasn´t such a bad general at all and the Redcoats were the best infantry around that period, especially after Boney got the largest portion of his well tried veterans fertilizing Russia.

Russians are mentioned in the Hornblower books? Uh? What did I miss there? Beware! C.S. Forester is about to press you into service.

隐藏: An Austrian Bright Spot

 

[Baron Conrad]

In America, most people thing Wellington or "British at Waterloo" (if really ignorant) beat Napoleon. Most non-history people don't realize that Napoleon was already beaten and France had already surrendered once by that time.

People who know a little more history give the credit to Napoleon's making "the Hitler mistake" and invading Russia.

Personally I think Poland are underrepresented in American/English media. No one at all knows that they elected their kings, conquered Moscow successfully, etc.

All that Americans know about Poland is that they got crushed in WW2. While in fact, they kept fighting from start to finish at home, abroad, and in the Russian army as well.

 

[noosers]

Well, I reckon most Americans assume they won the War of Independence all by themselves either, without the help ofthe funny frenchies at all, nor consider the changes in France during that period threating the very essence of the commonwealth interesting. 

 

[rapier17]

Talking of the American Revolt, Thomas Paine is heavily ignored. His work, Common Sense, was widely popular and helped to inspire Thomas Jefferson to draw up the Declaration of Independence. Thomas Paine ended up being considered so radical he was kicked out of America after the War of Independence despite how prominent a role his writings had been in helping to inspire the colonnials to take up arms and forge a new country. Funny that. Anyway, Paine ended up in France as part of the National Assembly. Just after he'd arrived the Assembly started to debate over whether to execute King Louis or not. He voted against the notion as in his mind it was the system that was the problem not individual royals - so -they- threw him into prison for not being radical enough! He just couldn't win.

For an often amusing, but also informative, lecture on Thomas Paine, I heartily recommend Mark Steel's lecture;


Just as a fun footnote - the French treasury stood at a 10 million livre surplus before the start of the War of Independence - it was 100 million livre in debt at it's conclusion. America would not have been able to become a new country if it hadn't had French funding & assistance yet American's, from what I've seen, tend to forget about the French.

 

[Austupaio]

Trafalgar seems to me as being the ultimate British victory* over the French and Spanish, our mortal enemies upon the continent. Waterloo is nice and all but it doesn't really lend itself to our naval traditions and heritage. 

*As an Englishman.

Nor does Wellington have anything as grand and iconic as this attributed to him.

隐藏

That is quite the monument.

 

[BenKenobi]

(Compare them with how media handles Napoleonic Bavarians, Württembergians, Danes, Saxons, Montenegrins and Austrians...)

While not praisable, it is quite understandable; mainly due to the size of said countries and also because they can be summed up to lolgermans. The Russia and the Austria on the other hand are just massive and these empires were there for quite some time to be noticeable by a human eye.

In the English-speaking world, the Russians (or Napoleon's invasion of their country) usually get almost all the credit for the collapse of the First French Empire.

The weather.

 

[TheFlyingFishy]

Just as a fun footnote - the French treasury stood at a 10 million livre surplus before the start of the War of Independence - it was 100 million livre in debt at it's conclusion. America would not have been able to become a new country if it hadn't had French funding & assistance yet American's, from what I've seen, tend to forget about the French.

I can confirm that U.S. schools do little in the way of educating us about the involvement of France in the Revolution. I, for example, had no idea that it impacted the French treasury so much. We are basically told that they showed up towards the end and blockaded the British long enough for the revolutionaries to finish the war. Or at least I was. So, yea, the French get very little pop culture or any cultural reference in the U.S. Aside from that dude in The Patriot.